- (1.) Heard Sri S.C. Tripathi, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Sri H.N. Singh, Advocate, who has filed an impleadment application on behalf of Arshad and others and another application has been filed by one Madan Sen Sonkar through Mithilesh Kumar Tiwari, Advocate who contend that the land could not have been allotted to the Petitioner and the Petitioner has obtained the orders from the Consolidation Authorities fraudulently.
(2.) This writ petition was entertained on 11.10.2006 and the following interim order was passed: Connect with writ petition no. 52795 of 2006. Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for Rspondents, who prays for and is allowed three weeks' time to file counter affidavit. The Petitioner will have three weeks thereafter for filing rejoinder affidavit. List for admission after expiry of the aforesaid period. The contention advanced on behalf of the Petitioner is that though his name has been recorded in the revenue records for a long period yet the entire proceedings for expunging him name are being undertaken ex-parte by the authorities without permitting him to participate in the same. It is further contended that authorities are misinterpreting the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hinch Lal Tewari v. Kamla Devi and Ors.,2001 RevDec 689 as well as the judgment of this Court in the case of Iqbal Ahmad and Ors. v. Deputy Director of Consolidation Deoria and Ors.,2005 98 RevDec 580. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the Petitioner is entitled to interim order. Until further orders of this Court, the parties to the writ petition are directed to maintain status quo with regard to nature, possession and entries in the revenue record pertaining to the land in dispute. The Respondents are further restrained from interfering in the peaceful possession of the Petitioner over the land in dispute. A certified copy of this order may be issued to the learned Counsel for the parties on payment of usual charges within 24 hours.
(3.) This writ petition having been filed in the year 2006 contains the following two prayers. I. Issue a writ of mandamus order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties not to disturb the right, title and possession of the Petitioner over the plots in dispute well described in the writ petition except following the due required procedure in accordance with law. II. Issue a writ of mandamus order or direction in the nature of mandamus be issued to the Respondent authorities commanding them to keep intact the entries in the relevant statutory records as it is today up to the time until and unless the same are not ordered to be modified, varied or expunged by any competent judicial forum.;