DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA,J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel, Shri H.N. Tiwari, learned counsel representing the respondent no.4-Police Training Institute and Shri Ghanshyam Tiwari, Advocate holding brief of Shri Kamlesh Singh, learned counsel representing the respondent no.5-Tractor Workshop Training Centre. Under challenge in this petition is an order dated 18.09.2018 passed by the Board of Revenue whereby notices on restoration application preferred by the respondent no.4-Police Training Institute and also by respondent no.5-Tractor Workshop Training Centre have been issued to all the parties in the case before the Board of Revenue. By the impugned order, the Board of Revenue has stayed further proceedings pursuant to the order dated 23.07.2018 passed by the Board of Revenue whereby the restoration application preferred by the petitioner was allowed and the land in question was ordered to be mutated in its name.
(2.) It appears that a case under section 34 of U.P. Land Revenue Act was initiated on the report submitted by Tehsildar in compliance of an order dated 18.01.2012 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.123512 (M/B) of 2011 whereby the district revenue authorities were directed to proceed with the mutation proceedings in accordance with law. The said writ petition was filed by the respondent no.3 with a prayer that the district revenue authorities be directed to register his name as the land in question belongs to waqf of which respondent no.3 is said to be a mutwalli. The mutation proceedings initiated on the report of Tehsildar under section 34 of U.P. Land Revenue Act in compliance of the order of this Court dated 18.01.2012 concluded in rejection of the claim of Khursheed Agharespondent no.3 and Tehsildar accordingly passed an order on 06.08.2014 rejecting his claim and ordering the property to be recorded in the Gaon Sabha. Respondent no.3 had filed a revision petition before the Board of Revenue which was dismissed on 15.07.2016. During the pendency of the said revision petition, the petitioner had moved an application on 28.04.2016 stating therein that the petitioner is a necessary party and he should also be heard. The claim put forth in the said application moved by the petitioner before the Board of Revenue was based on a sale-deed dated 09.12.2015 which is said to have been executed in its favour by M/s. Adhunik Sahkari Grih Nirman Samiti Ltd. It was also alleged by the petitioner that the property in dispute was sold by the recorded tenure holder in favour of M/s Adhunik Sahkari Grih Nirman Samiti vide sale-deed dated 17.03.1997. However, no orders could be passed on the said application and the revision petition was dismissed by means of the order dated 15.07.2016 by the Board of Revenue. Thereafter a restoration application was preferred by the petitioner stating therein that the order dated 15.07.2016 be set aside for the reason that the same was passed by the Board of Revenue without deciding its application seeking impleadment and without hearing the petitioner. The Board of Revenue accordingly permitted impleadment of the petitioner and vide its order dated 23.07.2018 not only set aside the order dated 06.08.2014 passed by the Tehsildar whereby the land in question was ordered to be vested in the Gaon Sabha but also ordered for mutation of the name of the petitioner, ignoring the fact that the petitioner on the basis of the alleged sale-deed dated 09.12.2015 had never moved any application seeking mutation of its name. The Board of Revenue while passing the said order dated 23.07.2018 also ignored the fact that name of M/s Adhunik Sahkari Grih Nirman Samiti was also never recorded on the basis of alleged sale-deed dated 17.03.1997,which is being disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.3, who has submitted that the document dated 17.03.1997 is not a sale deed; rather it was an assignment deed.
(3.) The Police Training Institute is a government organization and the land in question was given to it by the State Government by way of resumption under section 117 (6) of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act.;