HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - B No. - 908 of 2025 Court No. - 7 HON'BLE JASPREET SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. Notice on behalf of the respondent nos. 1 and 2 has been accepted by the Office of the Chief Standing Counsel. 3. Under challenge is the order dated 12.9.2023 passed by the respondent no. 2 whereby the revision preferred by the petitioner was dismissed affirming the order dated 30.3.2010 passed in case no. 468/1998-99 initiated under Section 34 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901. 4. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the property in question i.e. plot no. 307 was recorded in the name of father of the petitioner namely Mohanlal. It is further stated that on 2.6.1999 Mohanlal had executed the registered sale-deed relating to half share of the said property in favour of the predecessor of the private respondents. It is also stated that there was some dispute between seller and buyer, as a consequence, the said sale-deed executed by Mohanlal in favour of the predecessor of the private respondents was not acted upon. 5. It is also alleged that a compromise had taken place and in terms thereof, the sale consideration was returned by Mohanlal to the private respondent and after the death of Mohanlal on 31.12.2004 the name of the petitioner was mutated in terms of the proceedings under the U.P.L.R. Act. It is urged that in the aforesaid background the proceedings for Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Vijay Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Ramesh And Another .....Petitioner(s) Board Of Revenue, U.P. Lko. Thru. Chairman And 5 Others .....Respondent(s) mutation was not bona fide. The said order was challenged by the petitioner which has been turned down by the two courts. Hence, the instant petition. 6. Having considered the aforesaid submission and from perusal of the material on record, at the outset, it is noticed that generally a writ petition arising out of the mutation proceedings are not entertained by the court as a mutation does not decide the rights of the parties. This aspect has been taken note of by this Court in the light of the decision of the Apex Court in Jitendra Singh versus The State of M.P. reported in 2021 SCC Online 802. A co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Smt. Kalawati versus the Board of Revenue and 6 others in Writ B No. 295 of 2022 has taken note of the issue regarding maintainability of the writ petition arising out of the mutation proceeding and certain exceptions have been carved out indicating the circumstances where such a petition may be entertained by the Court. 7. If the aforesaid principle are applied in the instant matter, it would indicate that it is an admitted case of the petitioner that his father Mohanlal has already executed the sale deed on 2.6.1999. The fact whether there was a compromise and in terms thereof the sale-deed was nullified is a subject matter which is to be seen on the basis of some evidence. There is no material to indicate that any such compromise took place. A feeble plea was raised that the compromise was made and the amount was returned, however there is nothing apparent to substantiate the said fact. 8. In the aforesaid circumstances, where there has been no direct challenge to the sale-deed which was executed in the year 1999, this court does not find that assailing the sale-deed through summary proceedings emerging from Section 34 of the U.P.L.R. Act, 1901 may not be appropriate course. Two courts have already taken a view which cannot be said to be perverse. 9. In view of the aforesaid, this Court is not inclined to entertain the petition and the same is dismissed at the admission stage leaving it open to the petitioner to take recourse as may be available in law. WRIB No. 908 of 2025 2 10. Mere dismissal of this petition may not be construed as an expression of opinion on merits by this Court and if the petitioner has any grievance he may raise the same before the regular court, who shall decide the same on its own merits. September 18, 2025 kanhaiya WRIB No. 908 of 2025 3 (Jaspreet Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- KANHAIYA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench