- (1.) Heard Sri Ram Niwas Singh, learned counsel for petitioners and learned Standing Counsel on behalf of respondents no. 1 and 3 as also Sri D. D. Chauhan on behalf of the respondent no. 2. Notice need not be issued to the respondents no. 4 to 7 in view of the order being passed herein.
(2.) At the very outset, learned Standing Counsel has raised a preliminary objection to state that against the impugned order dated 19.09.2012 passed by the Up Ziladhikari, Burhana, District Muzaffarnagar in Case No. 104 under Sections 33/39 of the U. P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 (for short 'the Act'), State vs. Harpal Singh and another, statutory revision is provided and the petitioners ought to have availed the statutory remedy, hence, this writ petition be not entertained at the stage.
(3.) Learned Standing Counsel has also referred to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hinch Lal Tiwari vs. Kamala Devi and others, 2001 6 SCC 496 to state that no permanent rights can be matured by any person or tenure holder over the land which is a water body and comes within the category of Section 132 of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Act.;