- (1.)Heard learned advocate Mr. Het N Shah for the petitioner and learned AGP Ms. Dhwani Tripathi for respondent-State.
(2.)By way of filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs.
"(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or directions quashing and setting aside the impugned order dtd. 16.05.2019 passed in Appeal No. 51 of 2018 by the Deputy Collector(at Annexure-C hereto), impugned order dtd. 30/12/2019 passed in RTS/RA/No. 343 of 2019 by the District Collector(at Annexure-D hereto), the impugned order dtd. 12/05/2021 passed by the Special Secretary, Revenue Department in Revision Application No. MVV/HKP/VADAD/208 of 2020 (at Annexure-F hereto) as well as Entry No. 3745 mutated in the revenue record on 15/11/2010 (at Annexure-B hereto) and direct the revenue authorities to mutate the entry of the petitioner for the land in question as per the settlement dtd. 17/12/2020 (at Annexure-E hereto);"

(B) During the pendency and final disposal of the present petition your Lordships may be pleased to stay further operation, implementation and execution of the impugned order dtd. 16.05.2019 passed in Appeal No. 51 of 2018 by the Deputy Collector (at Annexure- C hereto), impugned order dtd. 30.12.2019 passed in RTS/RA/No. 343 of 2019 by the District Collector (at Annexure-D hereto), the impugned order dtd. 12/05/2021 passed by the Special Secretary, Revenue Department in Revision Application No. MVV/HKP/VADAD/208 of 2020 (at Annexure-F hereto) and direct the revenue authorities to mutate the entry of the petitioner for the land in question as per the settlement dtd. 17/12/2020 (at Annexure- E hereto);"

(3.)Learned advocate Mr. Het Shah for the petitioner has submitted that during the pendency of the matter before the revenue authority, settlement was arrived at between the parties and the consent pursis was filed before the authority to the fact that revision filed by the petitioner herein may be allowed and his name may be mutated in the revenue record. He has also submitted that the contesting respondents nos. 6 to 9 have already filed their affidavit thereby before the authority regarding settlement between the party and have also produced the agreement to that effect. He has also submitted that the contesting private respondents have already been served with the notice of this petition and they have chosen not to appear before this Court, as they have no objection if the petition is allowed. He has further drawn attention of this Court to various documentary evidence placed on record and prayed to allow this petition.