JUDGMENT :

Jaspreet Singh, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

2. Notice on behalf of respondent nos.1 and 2 has been accepted by the office of learned Chief Standing Counsel.

3. Shri R.S.Tewari, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of respondent nos.3 and 4 on caveat.

4. Under challenge is the order dated 24.10.2024 passed by the D.D.C., Lucknow whereby the revision preferred by the private respondents, has been allowed and the order of remand passed by the S.O.C. has been set aside.

5. In order to put the controversy in a perspective, certain brief facts giving rise to the instant writ petition, are being noticed hereinafter.

a. The disputed property in question i.e. plot no.1238 belonged to one Shri Amar Pal.

b. Amar Pal had executed a sale deed dated 16.6.1999 through his Power of Attorney holder in favour of private respondent no.3. Subsequently, Amar Pal executed another sale deed in favour of the predecessor in interest of the present petitioner namely Kamal Kishore Srivastava on 23.7.1999.

(c). Apparently, this dispute was escalated once Kamal Kishore Srivastava who was claiming rights on the basis of the sale deed dated 23.7.1999 sought his mutation whereas the pri