K.M. JOSEPH, J.

Appellants are the writ petitioners. They filed the writ petition seeking the following relief’s:

“(i) Issue a writ, in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 07.08.2013 passed by the Respondent No. 3 (contained as Annexure no. 12 to this writ petition).

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 2 to freehold the entire Nazul Land of the petitioners (as mentioned in Para no. 16 of this writ petition) in accordance with the directions contained in Government Order dated 02.12.2011 issued by respondent no. 1 (contained as Annexure no. 6 to this writ petition).”

2. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition. Hence, the appeal.

3. We have heard Mr. Vishal Gupta, Advocate, along with Mr. H.M. Bhatia, Advocate for the appellants; Mr. Vinay Garg, Advocate appearing on behalf of the MDDA; and Mr. Pradeep Joshi, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State.

4. Briefly put, the case of the appellants is as follows:

(i) Appellant Nos. 1 to 4 are the successors in interest of one Sri Sagar Mal Goyal and the other appellants, four in number, claim that they are nazul lease holders. Applicati