RAM KHILAWAN Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Arvind Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Rohan Gupta for the Kanpur Development Authority and Sri Rajeev Mishra for the respondent no.3.

(2.) The writ petition arises out of proceedings under Section 34 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act and seeks quashing of the order dated

(3.) 07.2015 passed by the Commissioner as also the order dated 16.10.2015 passed by Board of Revenue U.P. at Lucknow. By order dated 03.07.2015, the opposite party no.3 was ordered to be mutated over the land in dispute on the basis of free hold deed executed in his favour by the Kanpur Development Authority. This revisional order passed by the Commissioner been affirmed by the Board of Revenue. 3. The opposite party no.3 applied for mutation on the basis of a free hold deed executed in his favour. The Tehsildar by the order dated 29.12.2014 rejected the mutation application on the finding that the petitioner was in possession over the land in question and that the Kanpur Development Authority had no title to the land in question and could not have executed the free hold deed.