Ran Vijai Singh, J. - (1.) SRI R.P. Dubey has filed vakalatnama on behalf of respondent No. 4, which is taken on record. Heard Sri Swetashwa Agarwal along with Sri Ashish Kumar Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents and Sri R.P. Dubey along with Sri Satyendra Nath Tripathi learned Counsel appearing for the respondent No. 4.
(2.) BY means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for issuing a writ of certiorari quashing the orders dated 24.6.2013 passed by the Sub -Divisional Magistrate, Meerut in Case No. 39/2009 filed under section 143 of U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 as well as the order dated 20.5.2014 passed by the Additional Commissioner Meerut Division Meerut in Revision No. 04/2013 -14. Vide order dated 24.6.2013, an application filed by the respondent No. 4 seeking recall of the order dated 9.2.2009 passed by the Sub -Divisional Officer in a proceeding under section 143 of U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 has been allowed. Whereas by the subsequent order dated 20.5.2014, the petitioner's revision against the order dated 24.6.2013 has been dismissed by the Additional Commissioner, Meerut Division, Meerut.
(3.) THE facts giving rise to this case are that the petitioner claims to be charitable trust running a Technical Institution and it appears she has purchased the land in dispute, by two registered sale -deeds, from one Puran Chand. After purchase of the aforesaid land, she has raised construction and started running engineering college. The respondent No. 4 has also got executed a sale -deed of some portion of the same land by the legal heirs of Puran Chand on 15.9.2012. After the aforesaid sale -deed, on 2.5.2013, the respondent No. 4 has filed an application seeking recall of the order dated 92.2009 on the ground that the property was never partitioned and the petitioner has purchased unpartition land and the order dated 9.2.2009 was an ex -parte order. The Sub -Divisional Officer has allowed the application of the respondent No. 4 vide order dated 24.6.2013. Challenging the aforesaid order, the petitioner, herein, has filed revision, which has been dismissed on 20.5.2014.;