Court No. - 9
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 31370 of 2019 Petitioner :- Ravindra Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 8 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Akash Khare,Hari Om Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mahesh Narain Singh
Hon'ble Anjani Kumar Mishra,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Mahesh Narain Singh for the Gaon Sabha, respondent no.6 as also learned Standing counsel for the State-respondents.
The writ petition challenges three orders passed by the three Courts below allowing a mutation application, filed by the respondent, claiming on the basis of a registered sale deed in his favour.
The contention of counsel for the petitioner is that the mutation application was allowed exparte and the appeal and consequential revisions filed by the petitioner have been wrongly dismissed.
It is contended that an exparte order passed in a mutation case could not have been confirmed by the appellate and the revisional Court.
It is also stated that the sale deed executed in favour of the contesting respondent is also of the share of the petitioner. For this reason, the petitioner has already instituted a suit for cancellation of the sale deed.
It is next submitted that since a fraudulent action had been resorted to by the respondents, a criminal case has also instituted against them.
Proceedings under Section 34 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act are purely summary in nature and do not determine the title of the parties thereto. These proceedings have purely fiscal connotations.
In any case, Section 40A of the U.P. Land Revenue Act clearly provides that mutation orders are subject to the final orders, passed in regular title proceedings.
Admittedly, such title proceedings in the form of a suit for cancellation of the sale deed, which is the basis of the claim of the respondents, has been instituted by the petitioner and is pending consideration.
Under the circumstances, this Court does not find any justification to interfere in the writ petition at this stage.
Interest of justice would stand served, in case, the writ petition is disposed of with the observations that the mutation orders, impugned in this writ petition shall necessarily abide by the final orders, to be passed in the suit filed by the petitioner for cancellation of the sale deed on the basis whereof, the mutation orders have been passed.
It is therefore, ordered, accordingly.
Order Date :- 26.9.2019 RKM