1. With the consent of the parties, matter is heard finally.

2. In this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the validity of the orders dated 26.6.2012, 15.12.2011, 12.11.2010 and 22.9.2010, passed by Board of Revenue, Additional Commissioner, Sub-Divisional Officer and Tahsildar, respectively. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner has raised a singular contention that the controversy involved in the instant writ petition is squarely covered by the decision rendered by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 4.3.2014 passed in Writ Petition No.4542/2012 (Rajalal and another v. Komal Singh and another) [2014 RN 149]. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the Tahsildar, Sub-Divisional Officer as well as Additional Commissioner have failed to appreciate that the Will is not transfer but it is devolution on the basis of testamentary succession and, therefore, the provision of section 165(7B) of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959 would not apply to the fact situation of the case. It is further submitted that the Board of Revenue has dismissed the revision preferred by the pe