K.P. Singh, J. - (1.) THIS is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution by the State of U.P. against the judgments of the 1st appellate Court and the Second appellate Court in a suit filed by the contesting opposite parties under Section 229B of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act. The contesting opposite parties filed suits for declaration of Sirdari right in the disputed plots on the allegations that they had taken land from tenure holder in Pattas Dvami and they acquired Adhivasi and Sirdari right in the disputed land and since their names were not recorded in the revenue records as sirdars, hence the suits.
(2.) IT appears that the State of U.P. has contested the claims of the plaintiffs on the grounds inter alia that the plaintiffs were relations of the tenure holder, hence the Pattas relied upon by them were bad in law and did not confer any right upon the plaintiffs. It has been alleged that the Pattas were not executed in accordance with law, hence it could not confer valid title upon the plaintiffs and their suit should be dismissed. It was also alleged that the Pattas relied upon by the plaintiffs were executed by the tenure holders who were their relations and the purpose of the Pattas was to evade the provisions of the U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, hence the claim of the plaintiffs should not be accepted and various other pleas were taken to negative the claims of the plaintiffs. The trial Court dismissed the plaintiffs suit but the first appellate Court and the second appellate Court have given judgments for the plaintiffs of different suits. Aggrieved by the judgments of first appellate Court the State of U.P. has approached this Court.
(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner has contended before me that the lease in favour of the plaintiffs were not executed strictly in accordance with law, hence the plaintiffs could not acquire tenancy right in the disputed land because the appellate courts have patently erred in giving judgments for the plaintiffs.;