- (1.) HEARD Sri R.C. Singh, counsel for the petitioners and Standing Counsel for State of U.P. and Sri Taiq Maqbool Khan, Standing Counsel for Gaon Sabha and Sri. K.N. Srivastav, holding brief of Sri Sri Prakash Srivastav, for the respondents.
(2.) THE writ petition has been filed against the orders of Settlement Officer Consolidation (respondent -2) dated 18.08.2012 and Deputy Director of Consolidation (respondent -1) dated 06.08.2013, allowing the appeal of Gaon Sabha and remanding the case for fresh trial to Consolidation Officer and dismissing the revision of the petitioners from the aforesaid order, in title proceedings, under U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The dispute relates to the land of basic consolidation year khata 10, of village Singapatti, pargana Sidhuwa Jobna, district Kushinagar, which was recorded in the name of Gaon Sabha. The petitioners filed an objection (registered as Case 923 to 926) under Section 9 -A of the Act. It has been stated by the petitioners that the land in dispute was their ancestral property from the time of common ancestor Molahu, who was inherited by his sons Baishakha and Babu Lal. Babu Lal left the house in his childhood due to some quarrel as such after death of Molahu, the name of Baishakha alone was recorded in the records and after his death it was recorded in the name of Smt. Mulki, his widow. Baishakha and Smt. Mulki died issueless and was inherited by Lakshmi son of Babu Lal. After death of Smt. Mulki, it was wrongly recorded in the name of Gaon Sabha. Other objections were filed by Kolai and Chhatthu who claimed themselves to be the allottees of Gaon Sabha, of the land in dispute. Other objections were filed by Birjhan and Patru, who claimed their adverse possession over some plots of the khata in dispute. One Vishwanath filed an objection claiming himself to be daughter's son of Baishakha. Now Birjhan, Patru and Vishwanath are not contesting the matter. All the objections were consolidated and heard by Additional Consolidation Officer, Padrauna, who by his order dated 11.08.1980 held that the petitioners had inheritted the property in dispute after death of Smt. Mulki, being brother's son of Baishakha, her husband. Other objections were dismissed. The names of the petitioners were directed to be mutated over the land in dispute, deleting the name of Gaon Sabha.
(3.) GAON Sabha filed an appeal (registered as Appeal No. 1083/2173/2698) and Chhatthu filed an appeal (registered as Appeal No.1084/2174/2699). Both these appeals were consolidated. Later on, an application has been filed by Up -Pradhan of Gaon Sabha stating that Gaon Sabha had not filed the appeal and the appeal filed in the name of Gaon Sabha be dismissed. The appeals were heard by Assistant Settlement Officer Consolidation, who by order dated 12.03.1981 dismissed the appeal of Gaon Sabha, in pursuance of the application filed by Up -Pradhan and held that pattas of Chhatthu had already been canceled and he had no right. On these findings, both the appeals were dismissed. Chhatthu filed a revision (registered as Revision No. 1089) from the aforesaid order, which was dismissed by Deputy Director of Consolidation, by the order dated 17.04.1982.;