VIKRAM NATH,J. - (1.) THIS petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed for quashing the orders dated 17th January, 1975 and 13th July, 1973 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Basti and the Settlement Officer Consolidation, Khalilabad, Basti (Annexure nos. 5 and 4 respectively) and to maintain the order of the Consolidation Officer dated 24th February, 1973.
(2.) THE dispute relates to plot no.203/1 area 1-5-15 situate in village Tiwaripur, Pargana Bansi Purab, Teshil Bansi District Basti (hereinafter referred to as plot in dispute). In the basic year records it was recorded in the name of the petitioner nos.1 and 2 and the husbands of petitioner nos. 3 and 4. Respondent nos.1 to 3 filed objections under section 9A (2) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the CH Act) interalia on the ground that they were the daughter's sons of Smt. Sonkali/respondent no.4; the plot in dispute was recorded as occupancy tenancy in the name of husband of Smt. Sonkali; after death of her husband it was recorded in the name of Smt. Sonkali in the records of 1356 and 1359 F; upon abolition of zamindari Smt. Sonkali came to be recorded as Sirdar under the provisions of Section 19 of U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the ZA Act); on her death they would inherit to her estate. On these set of facts respondent nos.1 to 3 prayed that the name of the petitioners be expunged from the revenue records and their names may be recorded. The petitioners filed their written statement and claimed that prior to the date of vesting, Smt. Sonkali who was recorded as non occupancy tenancy had surrendered the plot in dispute in favour of the then zamindar, (the predecessor in interest of the petitioners) and as such the plot in dispute became the Khudkasht of the zamindars. Further in a correction of papers case prior to the date of vesting the matter had been referred to the Nyaya Panchayat where Smt. Sonkali had given a statement in their favour and based on the same the Nyaya Panchyat passed an order dated 9.7.1950 for deleting the name of Smt. Sonkali and recording the name of the petitioners. In the circumstances it was submitted that objection of respondent nos.1 to 3 were liable to be dismissed.
(3.) BOTH parties led evidence before the Consolidation Officer. The Consolidation Officer by order dated 24th February, 1973 relying upon the decision of the Nyaya Panchayat dated 9.7.1950 dismissed the objections filed by the respondent nos. 1 to 3. The appeal filed by respondent nos.1 to 3, under Section 11(1) of the CH Act was allowed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation vide order dated 13th July, 1973. The following findings were recorded by the Settlement Officer Consolidation. (i) Smt. Sonkali was recorded Dakhilkar in 1356 and 1359 F Khatauni. (ii) Smt. Sonkali came to be recorded as Sirdar after the abolition of Zamindari. (iii) The order of Nyaya Panchayat was prior to abolition of zamindari and had not been given effect to in the revenue records for a period of more than six years, even after the abolition of zamindari. (iv) The Nyaya Panchayat had no authority to decide the title as such the order of Nyaya Panchayat could not be relied upon. (v) The respondents no.1 to 3 had led both oral and documentary evidence to prove their possession over the plot in dispute and that they had been paying the land revenue. (vi) The petitioners did not lead any evidence to establish their possession or that the respondents no.1 to 3 were not the heirs of Smt. Sonkali. ;