JUDGMENT :

Rajnish Kumar, J.

1. Heard, Shri Mohiuddin Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri P.V. Chaudhary, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2. The opposite party no.1 is the court concerned.

2. This writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 19.10.1993 passed by the opposite party no.1 by means of which the revision filed by the opposite party no.2 has been allowed.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was a Sirdar of the land in dispute i.e. Gata No.25 having area of 70 Biswa. The petitioner applied for Bhumidari rights. On the basis of bhumidhari rights, the petitioner executed the sale deed in favour of the opposite party no.2 on 21.04.1976. On the basis of the said sale deed the opposite party no.2 applied for mutation before the Consolidation Officer. The objection on behalf of the petitioner was filed by his mother Smt. Indra Devi on the ground that her son i.e. the petitioner was minor at the time of execution of sale deed and the sale deed was got executed by fraud and no consideration was paid. The Consolidation Officer rejected the objection of the opposite party no.2 vide order dated 29.01.1978 / 30.01.1978. The opposite