Surendra Narain Singh, J. - (1.) These connected writ petitions arise out of proceedings under the UP Consolidation of Holdings Act. These petitions are directed against the order of the Dy. Director (C), who made certain alterations in the various chaks of the tenure holders by a common judgment. They are, therefore being disposed of by this order. It appears that Buchha, Pearey Lal, Ram Lal and Balbir filed four revisions before the Dy. Director (C) challenging the carvation of chaks made by the SO (C). Buchha appears not to have impleaded the petitioners, Anuj Kumar and others in the revision petition which he had filed challenging the carvation of the chaks made by the SO (C). Ram Lal, Pearey Lal and Balbir impleaded the petitioners in their revision petitions. In two revisions it appears that the petitioners were impleaded under wrong guardianship and in one of them the petitioners were rightly impleaded under the guardianship of their father, Mamchand.
(2.) The Dy. Director (C) heard all the four revisions together. He went to the spot, inspected the locality, heard the various tenure holders who were affected or who were to be affected by the order of the Dy. Director (C). The Dy. Director (C) specifically mentioned in his judgment that Anuj Kumar, chak holder No. 3, contended that chak No. 3 should be placed over certain plots. After having heard the arguments of the petitioners and the tenure holders, who were present before him and also Anuj Kumar and others, he gave an order by which a large number of chaks were interfered with.
(3.) Aggrieved with the order of the Dy. Director (C) making extensive alterations in the various chaks of the tenure holders, the present four connected writ petitions have been filed by Anuj Kumar and his two brothers under the guardianship of Mamchand, their father.;