A sale deed canceled by a Civil Court prevents subsequent actions vesting the land in the State, affirming the validity of the registered sale deed in favor of the petitioner.

JUDGMENT :

Chandra Kumar Rai, J.

1. Heard Mr. V.K. Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Manvendra Nath Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Pradeep Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.4/ Gaon Sabha and Mr. Tarun Gaur, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

2. Brief facts of the case are that plot no.114 area 0.417 hectare is situated at Village- Bharuhana, District-Mirzapur. The aforementioned plot originally belongs to one Munna Lal Sonkar and after his death his six sons became owner of equal share in the plot in question. One Babu Nandan son of Munna Lal Sonkar sold his entire share (1/6 share) by means of registered sale deed alleged to be executed on 11.11.2003 in favour of respondent no.11/ Rajendra Kumar Tripathi. Respondent no.11 applied for mutation on the basis of aforementioned sale deed which was allowed vide order dated 21.7.2006 but on the restoration application filed by Panna Lal mutation order dated 21.7.2006 was recalled and mutation application was rejected, accordingly, name of original tenant was restored. The sale deed alleged to be executed on 11.11.2003 was challenged in Civil Suit no.1054 of 2016, Computerized Case No.1501054 / 2016 by Gulab son of Babu Nandan & another impleading Rajendra Kumar Tripathi and Others as defendants. The aforementioned civil suit was decreed vide judgment and decreed dated 24.8.2021 by Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) Court No.2, Mirzapur cancelling the sale deed dated 11.11.2003. The order dated 24.8.2021 has attained finality. Legal heirs of Babu Nandan accordingly, executed a registered sale deed on 18.8.2012 in favour of the petitioner in respect to plot no.114 area 0.417 hectare (3652 square fit). On the basis of registered sale deed executed on 18.8.2012 in favour of the petitioner, the name of the petitioner was accordingly, recorded in the proceedings under Section 34 of U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 vide mutation order dated 22.2.2013. In respect to the sale deed dated 11.11.2003 executed by the Babu Nandan in favour of Rajendra Kumar Tripathi, a proceeding has been registered under Section 166 /167 of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act before Collector and an order dated 24.8.2015 was passed by respondent no.2/ Collector, Mirzapur vesting the land in question in State. Against the order dated 24.8.2015 petitioner filed a revision before respondent no.1, which has been dismissed under the impugned order dated 26.2.2016, hence this writ petition on behalf of the petitioner for the following reliefs:

"i. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 26.2.2016 passed by Respondent no.1/ Board of Revenue, U.P. at Allahabad in Revision No.2638 of 2015- "Bhaggan Devi Vs. Collector Mirzapur"- (Annexure no.11 to the writ petition) and order dated 24.8.2015 passed by the respondent no.2/ Collector, Mirzapur (Annexure No.9 to the writ petition).

ii. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to create third party right over the land in dispute i.e. plot no.114, area 0.417 hectare situated at village- Bharuhana, tahsil-Sadar, District-Mirzapur and to maintain status quo in respect of nature and possession of the land in dispute."

3. This Court vide order dated 16.12.2016 entertained the matter and granted interim protection for maintaining status quo.

4. No counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents in the instant writ petition.

5. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the sale deed alleged to be executed by Babu Nandan in favour of Rajendra Kumar Tripathi has been cancelled by the Civil Court vide