PHAGOO Vs. STATE OF U P & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed against the orders dated 17.8.2009 and 3.10.2009 passed by Naib Tehsildar, Bansgaon and the order dated 23.4.2010 passed by Assistant Collector, Bansgaon (Annexure Nos. 4, 5 & 7 to the writ petition).

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner as argued by his counsel that the petitioner is a deaf and dumb person, but not a person of unsound mind and therefore property that belonged to him could not have been sold by respondent no. 3 his mother Smt. Shyam Rathi who executed a sale deed alleging herself to be guardian of the petitioner, on 28.5.2007 in favour of one Smt. Durgawati wife of Lal Bachan arrayed as respondent no. 8 to this writ petition.

(3.) Smt. Durgawati moved two applications for mutation in respect of Arazi no. 319 and Arazi no. 89 before the Tahsildar Gola under Section 34 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act. Notices were issued and the petitioner filed his objection. The case was at the stage of evidence when Smt. Durgawati did not turn up for prosecuting the matter further and as such Tahsildar, Gola dismissed the two applications for mutation under Section 34 on 16.7.2007. The said two Application Nos. 1311/2025 of 2007 and 1311-B/2026 of 2007 were dismissed on 16.7.2007 by two separate orders. Instead of filing restoration applications for recall of the order dated 16.7.2007, Smt. Durgawati filed two fresh applications under Section 34 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act on 2.2009. These applications were numbered as Application No. 964/448 of 2009 and Application No. 965/449 of 2009. Notices were not issued by the Naib Tahsildar, Gola for filling objections to the recorded tenure holder i.e. the petitioner herein, but notices were issued to respondent no. 7 Smt. Shyam Rathi, the alleged vendor, who was in collusion with the respondent no.8.