1 SBCivil Writ Petition No.10133/2010 Padam Singh v. Amar Singh & Ors. Date of Order :: 2nd November, 2010 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR Mr. Himanshu Shrimali, for the petitioner. Mr. Moti Singh, for the respondents. .... By order dated 14.10.2010 learned Board of Revenue, Rajasthan, Ajmer rejected the application preferred by the petitioner seeking transposition as appellant. Learned Board of Revenue held that the petitioner is not a co-tenant in the land in question and if he is claiming any tenancy right otherwise than to the revenue records, he may agitate his cause by way of taking appropriate legal course independently. While challenging the order impugned the contention of learned counsel is that the courts below erred while appreciating the fact that the petitioner is having deep interest with the land in question and the land title vests with him. I do not find any merit in the argument aforesaid. 2 It is not in dispute that as per revenue records the petitioner is not a co-tenant and, therefore, if he is having any tenancy rights he have to prove those by adducing his own evidence. For that purpose he is required to avail his own remedy. Learned courts below, thus, rightly rejected the application. Accordingly, the petition for writ does not require any interference of this Court while exercising powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The same is dismissed. ( GOVIND MATHUR ),J. kkm/ps.