IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) No. 494 of 2009 Methodist Episcopal Church in Southern Asia through Power of Attorney Holder Smt.Suniti Singh W/o Sri Sunil Singh, R/o Heera Dungari, Almora, District-Almora. ……… Petitioner Versus (1) State of Uttarakhand through Collector, Almora, (2) American Methodist Mission through Rajeev Maisi, District Superintendent (Methodist Church of India), Church Compound, Near Admas School Almora (3) Village Panchayat Papersaili, District-Almora, (4) Richard Wheeler S/o Late W. Wheeler, R/o Village - Pappersali, Almora, District Almora. ………. Respondents ………………….. Sri K.N. Joshi Advocate assisted by Sri S.S. Chaudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri Gopal Narain, learned brief holder for the State/respondent No.1. Dr. Udyog Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent No.2. Date: April 16, 2009 Hon’ble B.S. Verma,J. By means of this petition, the petitioner has sought writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 20.03.2009 passed by Assistant Collector, Almora in Revenue Case No.54 of 2005-06, Richard Wheeler versus State & others, whereby the application moved by Smt.Suniti Singh for impleadment was rejected. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff (respondent No.4 herein) filed a declaratory suit before the Assistant Collector, Baramandal, Almora bearing revenue case No. 54 of 2005-06 against the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 for declaring him as Bhumidhar on the land in dispute. The petitioner moved application for impleadment in the 2 case on the ground that she has acquired ownership right by virtue of an agreement. The said application was rejected by the Assistant Collector vide impugned order dated 20.03.2009 on the ground that the Additional Chief Revenue Commissioner, Circuit Court, Uttarakhand, Nainital in Revision No. 196 Year-2003/Restoration No.NIL of 2007 has recorded a finding dated 25.08.2007 that the petitioner has failed to show as to how she has become the Bhumidhar and owner of the property. Further, how by virtue of an agreement, the right of recorded Bhumidhar can be transferred and the petitioner was not party in the proceedings. The said findings have also been affirmed by this Court in Writ Petition (M/S) No.1713 of 2007 vide order dated 05.08.2008, which was filed by the petitioner against the revisional order dated 25.08.2007. This Court was also of the view that until and unless the right and title of the petitioner is not declared by a competent court, there cannot be any transfer in favour of the petitioner. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. In view of the above narrated facts, I am not inclined to entertain the writ petition. The petitioner has alternative remedy to approach to the Court of Commissioner or the Board of Revenue. 4. The writ petition is dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy available to the petitioner. (Stay application No.2508 of 2009 stands disposed of.) (B.S. Verma, J.) 16.04.2009 P.Singh