RAM SURAT RAM (MAURYA), J. - (1.) HEARD Sri Arjun Singhal, for the petitioners and Sri Afaq Ahmad Ansari, for the respondents.
(2.) THE writ petition has been filed against the orders of Deputy Director of Consolidation (respondent -1) dated 26.12.2005, Settlement Officer Consolidation (respondent -2) dated 15.09.2004 and Consolidation Officer (respondent -3) dated 20.11.2002, passed in the proceeding, under Section 12 of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The dispute relates to the land of chak -108 of village Patti Kasabi and chaks -59 and 62 of village Patti Naugaon, tahsil Kairana, district Muzaffarnagar, which were carved out in the name of Imam Ali. After the death of Imam Ali, the name of Smt. Bashiran, his widow was recorded over it, by the order of Consolidation Officer dated 28.04.1984. After death of Smt. Bashiran, Taj Mohammad (now represented by respondents -7 to 11) and Sher Mohammad (respondent -6) (hereinafter referred to as the respondents) filed applications under Section 12 of the Act, for recording their names, on the basis of will of Imam Ali dated 20.05.1980. One Shabbir also filed an objection claiming himself to be the heir of Smt. Bashiran. Shabbir is now not contesting the matter. It has been stated by the respondents that Imam Ali during his life time executed a registered will dated 20.05.1980, according to which after his death, the property in dispute devolved upon his widow Smt. Bashiran and after death of Smt. Bashiran, it devolved upon his three sons namely Taj Mohammad, Sher Mohammad and Aas Mohammad. However, Aas Mohammad was absconding for more than 7 years and was not heard during this period as such his civil death be presumed and the property in dispute be recorded in the names of Taj Mohammad and Sher Mohammad, remaining two sons of Imam Ali.
(3.) THE applications of the respondents and Shabbir were registered as Case Nos. 146, 147, 148, 204, 205 and 206) under Section 12 of the Act. These cases were consolidated and heard by Consolidation Officer (respondent -3), who by order dated 21.01.1986, directed for mutating the names of Taj Mohammad and Sher Mohammad over the land in dispute. Thereafter, a time barred appeal (registered as Appeal No. 193/140) was filed from the aforesaid order, in the name of Aas Mohammad. Respondent -2 by order dated 10.01.1990 allowed the appeal and remanded the case to the Consolidation Officer for trail on merit and the parties were directed to appear before the Consolidation Officer on 21.01.1990. After remand, it is alleged that statements of Mahendra son of Ghasitu and Aas Mohammad son of Imam Ali were recorded on 21.07.1990 and 02.02.1991 respectively. However, according to the respondents, no such statement was ever recorded by Consolidation Officer, rather in collusion with the staff, fabricated statements of Mahendra and Aas Mohammad were placed on record. The respondents moved an application dated 16.12.1998, to recall Mahendra and Aas Mohammad for cross examination. This application was allowed by the Consolidation Officer by the order dated 18.02.1999 on the costs of Rs. 150/ and Mahendra and Aas Mohammad were directed to appear for cross examination on 10.03.1999. In spite of the order of Consolidation Officer dated 18.02.1999, Aas Mohammad was not produced for cross examination. The respondents, then moved an application to decide the validity of Power of Attorney dated 25.09.1986 allegedly executed by Aas Mohammad in favour of Jameer Hasan. The Consolidation Officer framed an additional issue on 25.01.2002 as to whether the Power of Attorney dated 25.09.1986, allegedly executed by Aas Mohammad in favour of Jameer Hasan was a forged document?;