RAMGOPAL SHARMA Vs. KAMLA BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this petition is made to the order dated 02.07.2014 (Annexure P/1), order dated 31.01.2005 (Annexure P/4) and order dated 06.06.2009 (Annexure P/6) passed by Board of Revenue, Additional Collector and Additional Commissioner respectively.

(2.) The parties have fought long drawn battle before the Revenue Courts. Shri Abhishek Bhadoriya, learned counsel for the petitioner, contends that Halkibai was the original owner of the land. The respondent No.1 is the daughter of Halkibai whereas petitioner is son of Parmanand who was brother of Halkibai. Kamlabai's name was mutated in the land record on 26.12.1991. The petitioner, feeling aggrieved by said mutation, decided to challenge it because no notice was issued to petitioner before mutating the name of Kamlabai in the revenue record. On 28.07.1992 petitioner's name was mutated. Respondent filed an appeal against the said mutation order dated 28.07.1992 before the Sub-Divisional Officer (SDO). The SDO dismissed the appeal on 28.03.1995. The respondent then preferred an appeal against the said order dated 28.03.1995 before Additional Commissioner, which was decided on 30.04.1997 (Annexure P/2). The Additional Commissioner remanded the matter back to the authority below to take a decision afresh.

(3.) In turn, on 06.12.1999, the Tehsildar passed an order in favour of respondent and accordingly, respondent's name was directed to be mutated. Feeling aggrieved by this order of Tehsildar, petitioner preferred an appeal before SDO. This appeal was decided by order dated 24.03.2000 (Annexure P/3). The appeal was allowed and case was remanded back to Tehsildar. Feeling aggrieved by this order, the respondent preferred revision before the Additional Collector. Said authority by order dated 31.05.2005 (Annexure P/4) set aside the remand order and confirmed the order of Tehsildar dated 06.12.1999 (filed in this case along with list of documents). The present petitioner then preferred a revision against the order dated 31.01.2005 before the Additional Commissioner which was dismissed on 06.06.2009 (Annexure P/6). The second revision of petitioner against this order was also dismissed by the Board of Revenue by order dated 02.07.2014. These orders Annexures P/1, P/4 and P/6 are called in question in this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution.