Vikram Nath, J. - (1.) BY means of this petition under Article of the Constitution of India the Petitioner has prayed for quashing of the orders of the three consolidation Courts dated 25.9.1986, 7.4.1988 and 2.12.1995.
(2.) KHATA No. 92, Village Hasanpur Lohari, Pargana Thana Bhawan, Tahsil Kairana, District Muzaffarnagar comprised of four plots 2481, 2482, 2488 and 2490 (hereinafter referred to as the Khata in dispute). In the consolidation proceedings after compulsory deductions the area which remained for allotment from khata in dispute was 8 -17 -0. One Karam Singh was the original tenure holder of the said khata. He had three sons Kala Ram, Tarn Tikaya and Ram Narain. Kala Ram died issueless and his share devolved upon Ram Tikaya and his heirs. Thus, Ram Tikaya and his heirs became share holder of 2/3 share in Khata in dispute. Remaining 1/3 share of khata in dispute belongs to Ram Narain son of Karam Singh and was inherited by his son Satnam Singh the Petitioner in this petition. After the death of Ram Tikaya his three sons Divan Chand, Jogendra and Mahendra inherited. Divan Chand is arrayed as Respondent No. 4. Jogender arrayed as Respondent No. 5 and as Mahendra had died his four sons Praveen, Raju, Kaka and Sanjay are arrayed as Respondent Nos. 6 to 9. In the provisional consolidation scheme Petitioner was not allotted any area from the khata in dispute. He filed objections claiming that the plots comprising the khata in dispute was the largest original holding and as the Petitioner had his private source of irrigation and also a room constructed in Plot No. 2488 he may be allotted a chak over his 1/3rd share in the khata in dispute. The said objection was allowed by the Consolidation Officer vide order dated 25.9.1986 and he allotted a chak to the Petitioner over plots 2474, 2479, 2480, 2481 and 2482 for an area measuring 01 -13 -12. The Petitioner filed an appeal on the same ground as his objection before the Consolidation Officer claiming further area in khata in dispute specially plot No. 2488. Three other appeals were filed by Lal Singh, Divan Chand (Respondent No. 4) and Om Prakash. The Settlement Officer Consolidation partly allowed all the four appeals vide order dated 7.4.1988 and abolished the chak allotted to the Petitioner by the Consolidation Officer over Plot Nos. 2474, 2479, 2480, 2481 and 2482 and allotted the same to Divan Chand (Respondent No. 4). Aggrieved by the same the Petitioner filed a revision which has been dismissed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation by order dated 2.12.1995. It is against these orders that the present writ petition has been filed.
(3.) I have heard Sri Sankatha Rai, assisted by Sri P.K. Rai and Sri Vidya Bhushan, Advocates for the Petitioner, Sri G.N. Verma, Advocate representing some of the Respondents and Sri C.S. Agnihotri, Advocate representing some of the other Respondents.;