The rightful mutation of land records follows the valid transfer of ownership after the original owner's death.

O R D E R

1.

Leave granted.

2.

The inception of the instant appeal lies in the application filed by the Appellant – Purchaser seeking mutation of her name in the revenue records in place of her vendor – Respondent 7 and 8 in respect of the land admeasuring 0.158 Hectares situated in Gata No. 170 M in Village Khuriyawali, Tehsil Khurja, District Bulandshahar which she had purchased from them by means of a sale deed dated

17.04.2008.

3.

The Naib Tehsildar, Arania vide order dated 06.06.2008 allowed the application of mutation filed by the Appellant recording her name in respect of the said land. On filing Appeal Nos. 64 and 65 of 2008 by Respondent No.6 against the mutation order dated 06.06.2008, the Signature Not Verified Digitarlly seignced obymmendation was made by the Deputy District Magistrate, Khurja NITIN TALREJA Date: 2025.08.14

09:55:11 IST Reason:

to the District Collector vide order dated 13.04.2009 to record the entry in favour of the State Government firstly, because initially, the original owner of the land - Asharfi Devi was recorded as non- transferable Bhumidar of the said khata number, she sold the said land to Respondent 7 and 8 by sale deed dated 27.08.1999 prior to 03.08.2001 when her name was recorded as transferable Bhumidar and secondly because no lease sanctioned in the name Asharfi Devi was found in the record.

4.

Later, an application was filed by the Respondent No. 8 seeking recall of the order dated 13.04.2009 of the Deputy District Magistrate, which was allowed on 08.06.2009, setting aside the order dated 13.04.2009 and restoring the appeal to its original number for its decision.

5.

Subsequently, in the second round, the Deputy District Magistrate dismissed the appeal of Respondent No. 6 on 22.02.2010, maintaining the order of mutation in favour of the Appellant – Sharda Devi. Later, on filing the Revision No. 117/09-10 by Respondent No.6 before the Additional Commissioner (Admn.), Meerut, it was allowed vide order dated 30.06.2010 and mutation issued in favour of the Appellant was set aside.

6.

Against the order dated 30.06.2010, Revision No. 90 & 91 /

ZAM / 2009-10 was preferred by the Appellant before the Member, Board of Revenue, U.P. Circuit Court, Meerut, which was dismissed on 13.09.2017. On challenging the same before the High Court in a writ petition, the order impugned has been passed, dismissing the Writ Petition of the Appellant, which is under challenge in this appeal.

7.

Having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the facts of this case, it is indeed true that Asharfi Devi executed a sale deed dated 27.08.1999 in favour of Respondent No. 7 (Vijendra Kumar) and Respondent No. 8 (Mukesh Kumar) for 0.632 Hectares of land in Gata No. 170 in Village Khuriyawali, Tehsil Khurja, District Bulandshahar, Uttar Pradesh. It was alleged that the transferable right accrued to Asharfi Devi only on 03.08.2001, subsequent to the said sale deed of Respondent No. 7 and 8.

8.

At the same time, the fact remains that Asharfi Devi died on

31.01.2004 and thereafter the land would come in inheritance to Respondent 7 and 8 – Vijendra Kumar and Mukesh Kumar, who are none else than the sons of Ashrafi Devi. The sale deed dated

17.04.2008 executed by Respondent 7 and 8 in favour of the Appellant – Sharda Devi is subsequent to the death of Asharfi Devi. Therefore, for all intents and purposes, the mutation as directed by the Tehsildar and confirmed by the Deputy District Magistrate does not warrant interference in revisional jurisdiction of the Additional Commissioner and the Board of Revenue. In our view, the High Court committed an error in maintaining those orders without considering the aforesaid fact. Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by the High Court confirming the order of the Additional Commissioner dated 30.06.2010 and the Board of