Sibghat Ullah Khan, J. - (1.) Heard Sri B.B. Paul, learned Counsel for the Petitioner in the first writ petition and Sri Surendra Tiwari, learned Counsel for the Petitioner in the second writ petition learned standing counsel for the Respondents 1 to 4 and Sri A.K. Mishra, learned Counsel for the Ghaziabad Development Authority which is Respondent No. 100 in the first writ petition and Respondent No. 5 in the second writ petition, and learned Counsel for proforma Respondents in first writ petition, i.e. Respondents 5 to 99 which term includes legal representatives of deceased Respondents. All substitution and impleadment applications are allowed. The first order challenged through these writ petitions is order dated 10.08.2000 passed by S.D.O./Assistant Collector Ist Class Ghaziabad in case No. 20 of 1999 -2000 under Sec. / U.P. Land Revenue Act. The case was initiated on the basis of report of the then Deputy Collector Ghaziabad dated 31.03.2000 and consequent direction of D.M. Ghaziabad dated 17.04.2000. The purpose was to ascertain the correctness and the validity of entry of name of the Petitioners and proforma Respondents over plot No. 421/1 area 3 bigha 10 biswa and other plots as Bhomidhar with transferee right with effect 1386 fasli (1978 -79 A.D.). The land is situate in village Banthala. The land in dispute was initially Gaon Sabha land and Petitioners and proforma Respondents were claiming to be allottees of Gaon Sabha land. The land had been acquired under Land Acquisition Act through notification under Sec. and Land Acquisition Act dated 19.03.1991 and 17.05.1991. On inquiry it was found that Khatauni of the year 1386 fasli was not available in the records. Tehsildar further reported that the file of allotment of the order 1979 was also not available in the office and patta register was also missing and further name of no alleged allottee found place in the register Malikana.
(2.) Inquiry Officer also enquired from the officer in -charge of the record room who informed that khatauni of 1386 Fasli was not sent to the record room. In the impugned order it is mentioned that khatauni from 1392 to 1397 Fasli was perused and matter was enquired from the then Pradhan and Sri Krishan Singh son of one of the alleged allottees. It is further mentioned that the entry of allotment was made in the khatauni from 1392 to 1397 Fasli from Serial No. 1 to 270 and at 270 -A, names of bhumidhars with non -transferable rights were mentioned. The S.D.O. in the impugned order observed that there was no occasion to make the entry against number 270 -A instead new number 271 should have been recorded in the relevant register khatauni.
(3.) Even though a very thorough discussion of the entire available material has been made in the order dated 10.08.2000, however the only defect is that alleged allottees were not heard. Against the said order, Avadesh and all other alleged allottees (total 86 applicants) filed Revision No. 84 of 1991 -92. Additional Commissioner, Meerut Division, Meerut dismissed the revision on 20.08.2002. Both these orders have been challenged through these writ petitions.;