Hon’ble Rajiv Sharma, J.

The present petition is instituted against the judgment dated 08.08.2014, rendered by learned Board of Revenue, Nainital, Uttarakhand in Second Appeal No.49/13-14.

2. “Key facts” necessary for adjudication of this petition are that the plaintiffs/respondents herein filed a suit under Section 229B of the Z.A. & L.R. Act. The trial court framed as many as 6 issues. The Suit was decreed on 05.04.2013. Petitioner-State filed a review application before the Court of Ist Assistant Collector, Haldwani, District Nainital against the

judgment and order dated 05.04.2013. The review application was allowed on 21.06.2013.

3. Thereafter, respondents filed an appeal bearing Z.A. Appeal No.78 of 2012-13 and it was allowed on 18.12.2013, whereby, the original judgments and decree dated 05.04.2013/17.04.2013 was restored.

4. The petitioner-State filed Second Appeal No.49 of 2013-14 before the Court of Board of Revenue. The said appeal was dismissed vide judgment and order dated 08.08.2014. Hence, this writ petition.

5. It has come on the record that the predecessors of the plaintiffs/respondents were in possession of the suit land. The partition has also taken place. The respondents have produced copies of Khatauni as also the oral evidence. The Patwari has also mentioned in the Revenue Records that the names of the predecessors of the plaintiffs were recorded. The entries were changed to the detriment of the plaintiffs without any order of the competent court or authority.

6. It is settled law that the Revenue entries cannot be altered without the orders of the competent court or authority. It is reiterated that the predecessors of the plaintiffs were recorded the owners-in-possession

since 1940-45. The courts below have appreciated the Revenue Records, placed on record, along with oral evidence.

7. There is no occasion for this Court to interfere with the well-reasoned order dated 08.08.2016.

8. Accordingly, there is no merit in this writ petition and the same is hereby dismissed.