- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) THE present petition questions the legality of the order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 22.10.2011 whereby the order of the Settlement Officer Consolidation dated 19.9.2008 has been affirmed. THE order of the Settlement Officer Consolidation proceeded to set aside the order of the Consolidation Officer dated 20.9.2004 whereby the petition filed by Tej Pal Singh and others had been allowed. The background in which the dispute had commenced is that one late Layak Singh was said to be the tenure holder of the property in dispute. The petitioners claim themselves to be related to late Layak Singh on the basis of the following pedigree:- Layak Dariyab Singh Room Singh Sardar Singh Madan Lal Mahipal Tej Pal Balbeer Ulfat Singh Har Pal Raj Pal Teekam Singh Rajveer Mahendra Pal Raj Kumar Udhishthir Ram Onkar Bhupendra Omendra Gajendra Babu The village where the land is situate came to be notified for consolidation operations under Section 4 of the 1953 Act on 22.10.1955. Late Layak Singh is said to have executed sale deeds in favour of late Smt. Drupdi Kunwar and Tej Pal (who was then minor). The purchasers did not get their name mutated and after conclusion of the consolidation operations and de-notification of the village under Section 52 of the U.P. C.H. Act, the purchasers filed an application for mutation which was rejected by the Sub Divisional Officer, Bisauli. The purchasers Drupadi Kunwar and Tej Pal filed an application for recalling of the mutation order and ultimately on 13.6.1960, the Sub Divisional Officer, Bisauli passed an order for mutating the name of Drupadi Kunwar and Tej Pal, on the basis of the sale deed executed by late Layak Singh.
(3.) THE successor of late Layak Singh, namely, Sardar Singh filed a suit under Section 229-B of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act along with other co-sharers in respect of the disputed land which was decreed on 22.8.1970. Against the said order, an appeal was filed by Smt. Drupadi Kunwar and Tej Pal, who succeeded therein and the learned Additional Commissioner vide order dated 29.12.1972 had set aside the decree dated 22.8.1970. Sardar Singh had also filed an application under Section 34 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act for mutation. He also filed Suit No. 545 under Section 229-B read with Section 209-A and 209-B of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act seeking declaration of Co-Bhoomidhari rights with a further relief that the sale deed of Drupadi Kunwar and Tej Pal Singh dated 15.2.1958 be declared null and void. The suit was decreed on 27.11.1976 but in appeal the learned Additional Commissioner vide judgment dated 22.2.1979 set aside the said judgment and decree. Sardar Singh and others filed a second appeal before the Board of Revenue and during the pendency of the second appeal, the village was again notified for a fresh consolidation operation under Section 4 of the U.P. C.H. Act. The second appeal accordingly abated on 23.2.1993, copy of the order of the Board dated 23.2.1993 is on record as annexure-3. The parties, therefore, filed objections under Section 9-A (2) of the 1953 Act.;