INDRAJ Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Akhilesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Shri Pankaj Gupta, learned counsel on behalf of the Gaon Sabha.

(2.) It is in mutation proceedings initiated at the behest of the State that the proceeding under Sec. 33/39 of the Land Revenue Act were initiated at the behest of the State pertaining to Gata No.595 situated at Village Ishanpur, Pargana & Tehsil Patti, District Pratapgarh on 16/1/2008 before the Sub Divisional Magistrate.

(3.) By means of the order dtd. 18/7/2008, the names of the Jaganath son of Bhaggu, the deceased, Badahu, Indraj, Tirath Raj, Udai Raj all sons of Jaganath were deleted from Gata No.595 i.e. Gata No. 595/0.938 hectare (old Gata No.566/9, 566/5, 566/10, 566/11. The said land was recorded as a pond while the remaining was kept as it is. Against the order dtd. 18/7/2008, the petitioner had filed restoration application stating that the proceedings were conducted ex parte and accordingly, by means of order dtd. 10/6/2009 the previous order dtd. 18/7/2008 was set aside.