Aloke Chakrabarti, J. - (1.) Challenging a part of the order of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) with regard to the injunction matter and the order passed in appeal, the present writ petition was filed.
(2.) It appears that the suit was filed by the respondent No. 2 claiming disputed plots of land as public burial ground. The defendants, who are petitioners here contested the proceeding claiming that the disputed land belonged to them as private burial ground.
(3.) After considering the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioners and perusing the materials on record, it is apparent that original registration was made by the Waqf Board whereby the disputed plots were included in the list of properties of the respondent No. 2. The said order on reference was stayed. In the present suit a claim was made by the respondent No. 2 in respect of the disputed plot on the ground of user of the disputed land as public burial ground from time immemorial. The impugned orders have been passed on prima facie findings accepting contentions of the plaintiff respondent No 2. On behalf of the petitioners though strong contentions have been made that the disputed lands are being used as their private burial ground. But nothing has been shown to justify an interference by a writ court with regard to such findings that the said plots belong to the petitioners and they are entitled to have burial of their own persons only. The appellate order has discussed the entire facts with sufficient details and findings have been reached on facts. In the absence of any conclusive material shown by the petitioners justifying an interference. I am of the opinion that the writ petition is liable to be and the same is accordingly dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.;