Anjani Kumar Mishra, J.

1. Heard Shri Kunal Ravi Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri Ansar Ahmad, who has filed caveat on behalf of respondent No. 4. This writ petition is being decided finally without calling for a counter affidavit in view of the order passed on 19.1.2015 while reserving the judgment in this case. The relevant portion of the order is quoted below

"It has been stated by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that respondent No. 5 in the writ petition is only a formal party inasmuch as he had set up a claim on the basis of an un-registered Will, which was discarded by the Courts below. These orders have never been challenged by him any further and, therefore, he has no interest in the writ petition as such.

As far as respondent No. 6 is concerned, it has been stated that she has, in fact, supported the case of the petitioner. Therefore, the writ petition can be decided finally without issuing any notice to respondent No. 6, as also to respondent No. 5."

2. This writ petition arises out of a mutation case under section 34 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act and is directed against the order dated 27.1.2014 passed in Revision No. 2006/LR/2011/12, the orde