learned friends,In a case of 70(b) of BTA 1948, a tehsildar passed an order against two brothers (placing actual charge on the first brother) and granted tenenacy exparte.(The land bought in 1965 belonged to their father and devolved on the survivors intestate) the first brother (respondents) died even before the proceedings could be started u/s 70(b). Due to ignorance of the appelants (fraudulently claiming tenancy) the order has come against a dead person 8 months after his death ,The deceased's heirs and sisters also got the names entered in the record of rights during the pendency of the case yet no substitution was preferred by appellants.Respondents appealled in state rev. tribunal against the order meanwhile the tehsildar has passed 32(O) and 32(G) behind back and it was seen that the order under sec 32(O) is issued to the survivors and the sisters for confirming the sale of the land.they were not a party to the case u/s 70(b).Tehsildar was shown and proved about this grave lapse. He has kept it for order.What order can be possibly made by him? Can tehsildar revise the order su-moto(the appellants have not asked for review)-.Case u/s 70(b) is pending in tribunal.Please comment on probabilities.
