2025:UHC:4302 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS/1386/2025 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Pradeep Kumar Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioner. 2. Petitioner is challenging the judgment and order dated 30.10.2024, passed by Deputy Director Consolidation in Revision No. 55 of 2023-24. By the said judgment, the mutation entry made in favour of petitioner by Consolidation Officer, as affirmed by Settlement Officer Consolidation was reversed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not even added as party respondent in the Revision filed by Charan Singh (respondent No. 2 herein), and without notice to petitioner the order passed in his favour by both the learned Courts below was set aside. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that petitioner had moved an application, seeking impleadment before the Revisional Court, which was also rejected by learned Deputy Director Consolidation by impugned judgment dated 30.10.2024. The copy of memo of revision filed before Deputy Director Consolidation has been brought on record by petitioner along with Misc. Application IA/1/2025. Thus, he submits that learned Revisional Court was not justified in allowing the revision against the judgment and 2025:UHC:4302 orders passed by Consolidation Officer and Settlement Officer Consolidation in favour of the petitioner, without notice to the petitioner. Thus, he submits that on this sole ground the order passed by Revisional Court is liable to be set aside. 5. This Court finds substance in the said submission. 6. Since both the learned Courts below had decided in favour of the petitioner and an order was passed to mutate his name in the revenue records as bhumidhar, therefore, such order could not have been set aside by the Revisional Court, without hearing petitioner. 7. On this short point alone, the impugned judgment and order dated 30.10.2024, passed by Revisional Court/ Deputy Director Consolidation, Haridwar is liable to be set aside and is hereby set aside. 8. The writ petition is allowed. The matter is remanded to Revisional Court to decide the Revision afresh after impleading the petitioner as party respondent. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 22.05.2025 Mahinder/ MAHINDER SINGH Digitally signed by MAHINDER SINGH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=da6212e6e78d94ed3134842bc6a8d6ca168979ca7b8c2f031a92d1a18b08923c, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=AB77B7C5B240908B392BE84F5CDD4C2AF35DC4626D305B1BC9EA4BABA43D2B8F, cn=MAHINDER SINGH Date: 2025.05.23 19:26:49 +05'30'