K.N.Misra, J. - (1.) This writ petition is directed against the orders passed by the consolidation authorities in proceedings under section 9-A (2) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act.
(2.) The dispute in the present case relates to plot no. 711/1 area 0.30 acres situate in village Jhansi, Pargana Dhoos, Tahsil Chandauli, District Varanasi, lids plot was recorded in the basic year Khatauni as Banjar. The petitioners filed an objection under section 9-A (2) of the Act claiming that they were zamindar's in pre-vesting period and the land in dispute was their proprietary grove hence they became Bhumidhar after the date of vesting and their names are liable to be recorded as Bhumidhars over the such land. Respondent no. 4 vishwanath also filed an objection clamming that the land in dispute was above of his predecessors-in-interest along with the predecessors of opposite party no. 6 Kumar. He further alleged that Kumar had sold his half share in it through sale deed in his favour and as such he has become sole owner and is liable to be recorded as Bhumidhar on the said plot. No claim was set up by Kumar, opposite party no. 6.
(3.) The Consolidation Officer, after taking the evidence of the parties, held that the land in dispute was Banjar and was recorded as Banjar and rasta since prior to abolition of zamindari and as such it could not be recorded in the name of the petitioners nor in the name of opposite party no. 4. Both the objections were, therefore, rejected by order dated 16th November 1970. The petitioners as well as opposite party no. 4 preferred separate appeals against the said order, which to were rejected by the Settlement Officer (Consolidation) vide order dated 17th April 1971 and the order pawed by the Consolidation Officer was maintained. It was observed by the Settlement Officer (Consolidation) that the ownership of the stray trees which are situated on the plot in dispute will continue to vest in the person who is owner thereof although he may have no sale from Sabha. The question of ownership of the stray trees situate on the land in dispute was, therefore, not decided. Aggrieved by these orders the petitioners as well as opposite party no. 4 filed revisions which too were dismissed on 10th August 1971. Opposite party no. 4 did not challenge this order any further and the present writ petition was filed by the petitioners alone. Petitioner no. 1 Sheikh Lal Mohammad has died and was substituted by his sons by courts order dated 26th April 1982.;