Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:33562 Court No. - 7 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3569 of 2025 Petitioner :- Raseed Khan And Ors. Respondent :- State Of Uttar Pradesh Through Additional Chief Secretary/Principal Secretary, Revenue And Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Sajjad Husain Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pankaj Gupta Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Hemant Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the State-respondents as also Sri Pankaj Gupta, learned counsel for the Gaon Sabha. 2. The impugned order dated 09.04.2025 has been passed on an application preferred by the petitioners alongwith others under Order 1 Rule 10 of C.P.C. seeking impleadment in the Appeal No. 9063 of 2024, Computerized Case No. T202408150509063 (Dayana & Others vs. Shahroj Alam etc.). 3. The aforesaid Appeal was filed by Km. Dayana Sageer and Km. Samana Sageer, daughters of Sageer Alam @ Rais Miyan under Section 210 of U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 (in short "Act of 1901"). 4. It would be apt to indicate that in the present petition particulars of the above named appellants have not been mentioned as mentioned in memo of Appeal. 5. In the aforesaid Appeal, the order dated 12.06.2006 passed by the Tehsildar (Judicial), Tehsil-Payagpur, Behraich in Mutation Case No. 15/129/783/21/02, under Section 34 of the Act of 1901 has been challenged. 6. The aforesaid Appeal is pending consideration before the opposite party No.2-Sub Divisional Officer, Payagpur, District- Bahraich. 7. Copy of the memo of appeal annexed as Annexure No. 5 to the present petition indicates that the Appeal was filed impleading private opposite parties namely Shahroz Alam S/o Sageer Alam, Firoz Alam and Afroz Alam, sons of Zauzaf Zakariya alleged sons of Sageer Alam, and on account of death of Firoz Alam, his legal heirs namely Shamsha Alam widow of Firoz Alam and Zoya Khan D/o Firoz Alam were substituted on 03.11.2024. 8. In the aforesaid Appeal, the petitioners namely Raseed Khan S/o Karam Khan, Maksood Khan S/o Naamdar Khan, Smt. Sarvara Begum @ Sarvara Khatoon W/o Maksood Khan alongwith others namely Chhotkau and Badkau, sons of Hariram, Kishori Bano W/o Shakoor, Mohd. Ashiq S/o Badlu, claiming themselves to be legal representatives of Shahroz Alam and others, filed the application under Order 1 Rule 10 C.P.C. Relevant portion of the application reads as under:- " ककशतककरर कक नकम दरर हह और वह हहतबद पकककर हह और पपवर ककशतककरर शहररर आलम आहद कक ककनपनन पहतहनधध हह। उ०प० रकवनयप कररर महनयपअल कक हनथग 165 सक 167 मम अपनल कक जकपन कक हवषय वसतत धलखक रकनक बतकयक गयक हह धरसमम ( च ) मम आवकदक व पतयथर कक नकम पतक धलखक रकनक कक उलकख हह रर हक उपररक ककशतककरकन पपवर ककशतककरर कक ककनपनन पहतहनधध हह , उनहम पकककर नहह बनकयक गयक हह और उपररक हनररय कक पभकव कक वल वतरमकन दरर खततनन ककशतककरकन पर पडकगक और शहररर आलम , शमसक आलम व ररयक खकन कर पकककर बनकयक गयक हह दरर ककशतककरकन व अनय हहतबद वयहकयर कर पकककर रकन - बपझकर नहन बनकयक गयक हह रर धसहवल पहकयक ससहहतक आररर । रल 10 कक उलघसन हह। अपनलकतकर कक मसशक दपहषत हह। " 9. The applicants including the petitioners preferred an application claiming themselves to be the legal representatives of Sahroz Alam S/o Sageer Alam and others and in this petition neither the relevant facts have been pleaded nor the evidence was placed on record, as appears from the record available before this Court. 10. Before this Court also no document has been placed on record to establish that the applicants including petitioners, who preferred the application under Order 1 Rule 10 of C.P.C. are legal representatives of Sageer Alam, mentioned as 'Sakire Alam Siddiqui' in this petition. Para 6 of this petition being relevant is extracted hereinunder:- "6. That upon the death of Sakire Alam Siddiqui on 16.05.1999, the names of the petitioners, being his legal heirs, were duly mutated in the revenue records in his place by way of inheritance (warasat) through proceedings under Pa.Ka. 11Ka dt. 30.05.1999." 11. Upon due consideration of aforesaid as also the impugned order dated 09.04.2025, this Court finds that no interference is required in the impugned order dated 09.04.2025 and this petition should be dismissed with costs payable by the counsel for the petitioners. It is for the following reasons:- (i) The facts pleaded in the present petition are not in consonance with the facts in the application preferred under Order 1 Rule 10 of C.P.C. (ii) Petitioner No.1-Raseed Khan S/o Karam Khan, petitioner No.2-Maqsood Namdaar Khan S/o Namdar Khan and petitioner No.3-Sarwara Begum @ Sarvara Khatoon W/o Maqsood Khan, are not legal heirs of Sageer Alam, mentioned as 'Sakire Alam Siddiqui' in this petition. (iii) Just to mislead this Court, learned counsel for the petitioners indicated the facts in Para 6, quoted above, of the present petition knowing well that the petitioners are not legal heirs of Sageer Alam, mentioned as 'Sakire Alam Siddiqui' in this petition. (iv) The application preferred under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC has been rejected vide impugned order dated 09.04.2025, after observing that Shahroz Alam is contesting the case and therefore his legal representatives are not required to be impleaded. (v) There is no evidence on record to suggest/establish that the applicants named above including the petitioners were/are legal heirs/representatives of Sageer Alam, mentioned as 'Sakire Alam Siddiqui' in this petition. 12. For the aforesaid reasons, the petition being mis-conceived is dismissed with costs of Rs. 15,000/-, which shall be deposited by Mr. Sajjad Husain, Advocate before this Court within ten days from today. In case, he fails to deposit the aforesaid amount before this Court within time, then the same shall be recovered from him as arrears of the land revenue. This cost shall be paid to High Court Legal Services, Lucknow. Order Date :- 30.5.2025 Vinay/- Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench