- (1.) BY means of this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 20.11.1999 passed by the respondent no. 3-Prescribed Authority at Mahoba by which his name has been removed from the revenue records over Gata No. 240 area 1.44 acres.
(2.) THE admitted facts of the case are that while proceedings of ceiling had already been initiated by the State Government against the original tenure holder Shri Jayendra Singh, the petitioner purchased a portion of the land in respect of which ceiling proceedings had already been initiated being Gata No. 240 area 1.44 acres situate in Mauza Kulpahar District Mahoba. On the basis of the sale deed dated 26.5.1975 the petitioner applied for mutation and mutation was also allowed on 26.3.1996. In paragraph 5 of the writ petition, the petitioner has admitted that during the mutation proceedings it was well within his knowledge that the land which he had purchased was under ceiling proceedings. The petitioner has sought to derive support from an order passed in writ petition no. 6548 of 1988 filed by the respondent nos. 4,5 and 6 who are stated to be the sons of Jayendra Singh. Copy of the order of the High Court dated 3.5.1996 has been filed as Annexure-3 to the writ petition and from a reading of the same it is seen that the said writ petition was filed for setting aside the order dated 7.11.1977 rejecting a restoration application of respondents no. 4,5 and 6. There is no mention in the order of the High Court regarding any ceiling proceedings or with regard to the land in question purchased by the petitioner and, therefore, the said order in my opinion is ofno assistance to the petitioner in any manner in this case. I have heard Shri M.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitoiner and the learned standing counsel for the respondent no. 1 and 2. No one appears for the respondent nos. 4,5 and 6 though the case is listed peremptorily today.
(3.) FROM a perusal of the impugned order it is seen that the name of the petitioner has been removed from the revenue records in respect of Gata No. 240 area 1.44 acres. According to the petitioner this land was purchased by him through a registered sale deed on 26.5.1975 from the original tenure holder Jayendra Singh. However, the petitioner applied for mutation in the year 1996 and the mutation was allowed on 26.3.1996. In paragraph 5 of the writ petition, the petitioner had admitted that during the mutation proceedings he was fully aware of the fact that in respect of the land which he had purchased ceiling proceedings were already pending. The original tenure holder has not challenged the proceedings under the U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960. The petitioner being a purchaser of the plot in question after the ceiling proceedings have already been initiated has absolutely no locus to challenge either the ceiling proceedings or the impugned order by which his name has been removed from the revenue records. The petition lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.;