IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 1690 of 2006 (M/S) Smt. Punni ………..Petitioner Versus Samay Singh …….Respondent Shri Tapan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.C. Bhatt, learned counsel for the respondent. Dated: 10th June, 2010 Hon’ble V.K. Bist, J. MCC. No.903 of 2009 (Review/Recall Application) Heard learned counsel for the parties. Present review/recall application has been filed for reviewing/recalling the order dated 22.10.2009 passed by this Court by which the writ petition filed by the petitioner was allowed. Ground of review/ recall application is that the order impugned in the writ petition was passed by the Board of Revenue, U.P., Merrut on 08.01.2004 and this Court have no jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition against the order passed by the Board of Revenue, U.P., Merrut. I am satisfied with arguments of the learned counsel for the review applicant/respondent. Consequently, the review/recall application is allowed. Order dated 22.10.2009 passed by this Court is recalled. 2 Writ Petition No. 1690 of 2006 (M/S) Learned counsel for the respondent raised preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the writ petition on the ground of jurisdiction. The petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order passed by the Board of Revenue, U.P., Merrut. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the petition filed against the order passed by the Board of Revenue, U.P., Merrut. I am satisfied with the arguments of the learned counsel for the respondent. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as not maintainable. It will be open for the petitioner to avail appropriate remedy before the appropriate Court. (V.K. Bist, J.) Arpan 10.06.2010