Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:11499 Court No. - 8 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 1674 of 2025 Petitioner :- Raghav Ram Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Faiz Ahmad Khan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Notice on behalf of respondent nos. 1 to 3 has been accepted by the office of the learned Chief Standing Counsel. 2. Under challenge is the order dated 30th January, 2025 passed by the respondent no. 2 whereby the revision preferred by the present petitioner has been rejected affirming the order passed by the respondent no. 3 dated 31.12.2009 in mutation proceedings. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the property in question belonged to one Sri Chhedi who had adopted the petitioner as his own son. 4. It is urged that in respect of the aforesaid property, the other brother of the petitioner by resorting to subterfuge got the sale deed executed. This came to be challenged in mutation proceedings which was held against the petitioner. It was thereafter challenged by filing a revision which has also been dismissed. 5. It is also urged that the issue which clearly indicates that the petitioner was the son of Sri Chhedi and his name ought to have been recorded and in this view of the matter, the courts concerned have failed to exercise the jurisdiction in accordance with law especially when criminal proceedings have also been initiated against the brother of the petitioner wherein a charge sheet has been filed. 6. Having considered the aforesaid and from the perusal of the material available on record, this Court finds that the plea as to whether the petitioner was the son of Rajit Ram or the adopted son of Chhedi is the matter which is already engaging the attention of the Competent Civil Court in Regular Suit No. 72 of 2010 wherein the petitioner has already sought the relief of cancellation of sale deed dated 19.11.2009 and injunction. 7. In light of the fact that the disputed questions have yet to be considered in the suit and the substantive relief of cancellation of the sale deed has been called in question, there are no accentuating circumstances which may persuade this Court to entertain the petition arising out of the mutation proceedings, hence, without expressing any opinion on merits, the present petition is dismissed leaving it open for the petitioner to contest the proceedings before the Civil Court, needless to say that mutation proceedings are only summary in nature and any order passed by the Competent Court on the regular side would bind the mutation proceedings. 8. It is made clear that mere dismissal of the instant petition may not come in the way of the petitioner to contest his proceedings before the regular court. Order Date :- 24.2.2025 Asheesh/- Digitally signed by :- ASHEESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench