KALEY KHAN Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition, the petitioners have challenged an order passed by Board of Revenue whereby it held that revision against an order allowing restoration is not maintainable.

(2.) The relevant facts are that petitioners Kaley Khan and Sher Ali moved for mutation on the basis of a will. The Tehsildar allowed mutation. An application for restoration was moved by Muzammil Khan, husband of opposite party Smt. Illiyasi and father of opposite party Km. Tamanna, which was rejected by Tehsildar Mawana, district Meerut and case was restored. A revision under Section 218 of U. P. Land Revenue Act was preferred by Kaley Khan and Sher Ali against order passed in appeal. The Additional Commissioner (Judicial) Meerut Division, on being satisfied, recommended to Board of Revenue, U. P., Lucknow, for allowing revision and setting aside of order of Sub-Divisional Officer, Mawana but the Board of Revenue, U. P., Lucknow, rejected the reference on the ground that no revision is maintainable against an order allowing restoration. Aggrieved, the petitioners have filed this writ petition in cases arising out of proceedings under Section 34 of U. P. Land Revenue Act. The question which arises for consideration in this case is as to whether a revision under Section 218 of U. P. Land Revenue Act is maintainable against an order allowing restoration application?

(3.) The revision against an order passed in appeal was filed under Section 218 of U. P. Land Revenue Act, which reads as follows :