Mutation proceedings under the U.P. Land Revenue Act are summary in nature and do not determine title; a registered sale deed remains valid until annulled by a competent court.

JUDGMENT

Rajeev Misra, J.

Heard Mr. Vinod Kumar Upadhyay, the learned counsel for petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel for respondents-1,2,3,4 and Mr. Ram Chandra Kushwaha, the leaned counsel for respondent-5.

2. Perused the record.

3. Challenge in this writ petition is to the order dated 24.10.2016, passed by respondetn-3- Tehsildar, Tehsil Rampur Maniharan, District- Saharanpur (Annexure-5 to the writ petition), the order dated 28.10.2016, passed by respondent-4- Nayab Tehsildar, Tehsil Rampur, Maniharan, District Saharanpur (Annexure-4 to the writ petition), the order dated 26.3.2018, passed by respondent-4 Naib Tehsildar, Tehsil Rampur, Maniharan, District Saharanpur (Annexure-3 to the writ petition), the order dated 13.8.2020, passed by respondent 2,- Additional Commissioner (Admin)-II, Saharanpur (Annexure-2 to the writ petition) and the order dated 4.10.2023, passed by respondent-2,- Additional Commissioner (Admin)-II, Saharanpur (Annexure-1 to the writ petition).

4. Record shows that a registered sale deed 2.1.2014 was executed by petitioner in favour of respondent-5, Sandeep Kumar. On the basis of aforesaid sale deed, respondent-5 claimed mutation. He accordingly filed mutation case in terms of section 34 U.P. Land Revenue Act. The same was registered as Mutation Case No. 598 of 2014 (Sandeep Kumar v. Smt. Pavitra Devi). However, the aforesaid mutation case came to be dismissed vide order dated 17.2.2014 passed by respondent-3 Tehsildar, Tehsil Rampur Maniharan, District- Saharanpur (Annexure-7 to the writ petition).

5. Feeling aggrieved by above order dated 17.2.2014, the contesting respondent no. 5 filed a restoration application dated 24.10.2016, seeking recall of order dated 17.2.2014 and restoration of the mutation case aforementioned to its original number and status. This restoration application came to be allowed by respondent-4 Naib Tehsildar, Tehsil Rampur, Maniharan, District Saharanpur on the same day i.e. vide order dated 24.10.2016. Ultimately the mutation case filed by the respondent 5 i.e. Mutation Case No. T201409600598 of 2014 was allowed by respondent-3 Tehsildar, Tehsil Rampur Maniharan, District- Saharanpur vide order dated 28.10.2016.

6. Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 28.10.2016 referred to above, petitioner filed a time barred restoration application dated 27.4.2017 seeking recall of the order dated 28.10.2016 and restoration of the mutation case in which, order dated 28.10.2016 was passed to its original number and status. Even though aforementioned restoration application was barred by time, no separate application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act duly supported by an affidavit was filed. Ultimately, the restoration application filed by petitioner came to be dismissed vide order dated 26.3.2018, passed by respondent-4 Naib Tehsildar, Tehsil Rampur, Maniharan, District Saharanpur.

7. Order dated 26.3.2018 was challenged by petitioner. He, accordingly filed a revision before the revisional authority i.e Commissioner, Saharanpur and same was registered as Revision No. 00532 of 2022 (Smt. Pavitra v. Sandeep Kumar). However, the said revision came to be dismissed by a detailed order dated 13.8.2020 passed by respondent 2, Additional Commissioner (Administration)-II, District-Saharanpur. Subsequent to above, petitioner filed a restoration application dated 21.08.2020 seeking recall of order dated 13.8.2020. The restoration application filed by petitioner also came to be rejected vide subsequent order dated 4.10.2023, passed by respondent-2 Additional Commissioner (Admin)-II, Saharanpur.

8. Thus feeling aggrieved by aforesaid orders, petitioner has now approached this court by means of present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

9. Learned counsel for petitioner has invited the attention of Court to the order dated 17.2.2014 passed by respondent-4 Naib Tehsildar, Tehsil Rampur, Maniharan, District Saharanpur, copy of which is on record at page 64 of the paper book.