RAM ROHAN Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned State Counsel.

(2.) Under challenge in this petition is an order dated 16.11.2018 passed by the Tehsildar, Unchahar, district-Raebareli whereby the application moved by respondent no.3-Km. Soni seeking her substitution in place of her mother, Prema Devi has been allowed in the proceedings under Sec. 34 of U.P. Land Revenue Act. The petitioner also challenges the order dated 11.12.2018 passed by the Board of Revenue whereby the revision petition preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 16.11.2018 has been dismissed.

(3.) The facts of the case which can be culled out from the pleadings available on record are that the original tenure holder of the land in dispute was one late Satish Chandra Srivastava, who is said to have died on 30.08.1994. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner one Smt. Tara Devi was the wife of original tenure holder who died on 03.06.1994. After death of original tenure holder late Satish Chandra Srivastava, four sets of objections/applications seeking mutation under Sec. 34 of U.P. Land Revenue Act in respect of property in dispute were filed. The first set of objection/application was filed by Smt. Prema Devi, who claimed to be widow of the deceased original tenure holder, Satish Chandra Srivastava and she also claimed mutation of her name on the basis of some will said to have been executed in her favour. The second set of objection/application was filed claiming mutation over the property in question by petitioner-Ram Rohan, who is said to be the servant of the original tenure holder who claimed mutation on the basis of some alleged will said to have been executed in his favour by the original tenure holder. The third set of objection/application seeking mutation of his name was moved by one Padam Prasad Srivastava. He also claimed mutation on the basis of some alleged will said to have been executed by the deceased tenure holder, late Satish Chandra Srivastava. The fourth set of objection/application seeking mutation of their names was moved by Smt. Beena, Smt. Kanti and Smt. Shanti Devi, who have been arrayed as respondent nos.5, 6 and 7 respectively in this writ petition on the basis of succession. These individuals have claimed mutation over the property in dispute on the ground that they are the successors of the deceased tenure holder being his sisters.