SIBGHAT ULLAH KHAN, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) THIS writ petition is directed against the order dated 26.06.2009 passed by Collector/District Deputy Director of Consolidation (District D.D.C.) Kaushambi in Case No.11 of 2009 under Section 48 U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act (U.P.C.H. Act), State Vs. Zafarul Haq (petitioner no.1), Rajpati (petitioner no.3) Gulab Singh (since deceased and survived by petitioner nos.4 to 7) and Kamla Devi (petitioner no.2). Gaon Sabha Barethi, Kamalpura, Post Office Noorpur, Pargana and Tehsil Chail, District Kaushambi through its Pradhan respondent no.3 was opposite party no.5 in the said case no.11 of 2009. Petitioner no.8 in the writ petition is son of Rajpati petitioner no.3. Petitioner nos.9 and 10 are sons of Zamirul Haq. Copy of the order dated 26.06.2009 is Annexure-1 to the writ petition. Against the said order petitioner nos.4, 5, 6, 8, 9 and 10 filed recall application which was dismissed by the Collector/District D.D.C., Kaushambi on 17.08.2009, copy of the said order is Annexure-2 to the writ petition, which has also been challenged. The matter related to plot nos.469 and 462 old number of which was 695 situate in Mauja Barethi. The case of the State, applicant before the Collector, was that the land was a pond and was entered as such in 1320 Fasli (1912-13 AD) and 1359 Fasli (1951-52 AD) when zamindari was abolished in U.P. however, during consolidation the opposite parties had got their names entered upon the land in dispute as bhumidhars with transferable rights. In the impugned order, it is mentioned that according to C.H. Form Nos.40 and 41 (comparative table) the old plot no.695/1 was newly numbered as plot no.462 area 0.571 hectare and old plot no.695/2 was newly numbered as 462 area 1.803 hectares. It was further asserted by the State before the Revisional Court that by making forgery and manipulation in the revenue records, the opposite parties had got their names entered into the revenue record. A report was called for from Settlement Officer Consolidation, Allahabad (S.O.C.) who informed the Collector through letter dated 28.05.2009 that a public interest litigation had been filed by one Nafees Ahmad in the Allahabad High Court being writ petition no.13608 of 2009 which was disposed of on 06.03.2009 and Collector was directed to decide the matter in the light of Supreme Court authority reported in Hinch Lal Tiwari v. Kamala Devi AIR 2001 SC 3215. Before the Collector, the authority reported in Smt. Shamli Devi Vs. State of U.P. 2008 (104) R.D. 748 was also cited. Nafees Ahmad is respondent no.4 in this writ petition.
(3.) IN view of the aforesaid authorities the Collector held that even if the Consolidation Courts had earlier passed some order setting the pond with some private persons, it was utterly illegal without jurisdiction and liable to be ignored. It was further held that in U.P. C.H. Form No.45, the entry of names of Anwarul Haq, Basdeo, Mahaveer was utterly without jurisdiction. These persons were predecessors in interest of the petitioners.;