R.H. Zaidi, J. - (1.) The present petition arises out of the proceedings under Sections 33/39 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act and is directed against the orders dated 24.2.1999 and 27.2.2001 passed by respondent Nos. 2 and 1 respectively.
(2.) It is well settled in law that against the order passed under Sections 33/39 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act, a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not maintainable inasmuch as the said proceedings are summary in nature and the findings recording in these proceedings are not binding either on the parties or on the authorities/courts on the regular side. A reference in this regard maybe made to the following decisions -
(3.) Shah Mohammed Shabbir Ata v. District fudge, Lucknow and others, 1984 AWC 928.; Brahma Deo and others v. Board of Revenue U.P. and others, 1986 RD 302. ;Ram Narain and others v. Deputy Director of Consolidation, Varanasi and others, 1990 RD 20. and Jaipal Singh v. Board of Revenue and others, 1956 AWR 518.;