DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA,J. - (1.) Since subject matter of these two petitions are intertwined, the Court, with the consent of learned counsel for parties, proceeds to decide both petitions by the following common judgment and order.
(2.) Both the petitions arise out of the orders passed by the revenue courts in mutation proceedings.
(3.) Admittedly the original recorded tenure holder of the land in question was one Surya Lal, who is said to have died in the year 1980. After his death, name of respondent no.4-Mast Ram in Writ Petition No.9944 (M/S) of 2019 was recorded under Section 33A of U.P. Land Revenue Act in PA-11 on 30.01.1981. His name was recorded as he alleges himself to be the son of the deceased tenure holder Surya Lal and accordingly treating the matter to be undisputed, name of Mast Ram was recorded in the revenue records on 30.01.1981. After a gap of around 24 years, the predecessors-in-interest of the petitioners moved an application on 03.06.2004 under Section 34 of U.P. Land Revenue Act for getting their names mutated alleging that they are the successors of the deceased tenure holder Surya Lal and on the said application, an order was passed by the Tehsildar, Bhinga, whereby names of the predecessors-in-interest of the petitioners were ordered to be mutated vide order dated 23.02.2005.;