ANJANI KUMAR MISHRA, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri Manish Kumar Nigam, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S.K. Mishra, who has filed caveat on behalf of respondent no. 3, the sole contesting respondent in the writ petition.
(2.) THE writ petition is directed against the orders dated 15.4.2014 and 27.6.2014, passed by the Settlement Officer, Consolidation (for short, SOC) and the Dy. Director of Consolidation (for short, DDC), respectively.
(3.) THE facts of the case, briefly stated, are that, admittedly, the land in dispute belonged to one Avtar. The petitioner claims on the basis of a will executed in her favour by Avtar. It is the further case of the petitioner that an order was passed in her favour by the Assistant Consolidation Officer (for short, ACO) for mutating her name over the land in dispute on the basis of the aforesaid will on 14.4.1994. Although this order was passed, the same was not implemented in the revenue records. On the contrary, on the death of Avtar, his heirs were mutated, as a result whereof the petitioner initiated proceedings under section 34 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act for recording her name over the plots in dispute on the basis of the order of the ACO passed in her favour. The Naib Tehsildar, by his order dated 15.10.1999 allowed the application under section 34 of the Land Revenue Act.;