S. Saghir Ahmad, J. - (1.) THIS is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.
(2.) CERTAIN plots of village Balrampur, pargana Miranpur, Tahsil and district Sultanpur, which have been specified in para 2 of the petition, were recorded in the basic year in the name of Maharaj Din and since no objections were filed by any one against the basic year entry, it was allowed to continue and chak No. 23 was proposed in his favour. It was at this stage, i.e. after the issue of C.H. Form -23, that opposite party No. 3, who was the wife of Maharaj Din, filed objection dated 18 -10 -75 (Annexure -3) against the basic year entry. She claimed that plots in dispute belonged to her exclusively as those plots had come down to her from her father. Subsequent to the filing of these objections, Maharaj Din, husband of opposite party No. 3, died. Petitioner who is the adopted son of Maharaj Din and opposite party No. 3 was alone left in the field. He admittedly is a minor. It may be stated that objections, which were filed by opposite party No. 3, were barred by time and consequently an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act was also filed by her. This application was allowed by the consolidation officer by his order dated 22 -12 -75 which is contained in Annexure -6. The delay in filing the objection was condoned. This order was challenged by the Petitioner in a revision which was filed by him through his next friend Sri. Shyam Lal. It was dismissed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation by his order dated 25 -3 -76 on the ground that Shyam Lal, who had acted as next friend of the Petitioner in that revision, had not disclosed his relationship with the Petitioner and, therefore, the revision filed by Shyam Lal, the so called next friend, was not maintainable.
(3.) THE Petitioner then filed another revision in which the exact relationship of Shyam Lal with the Petitioner was mentioned. This revision was also dismissed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation by his order dated 17 -8 -77 on the ground that since the earlier revision had already been dismissed as not maintainable, the second revision had also to be dismissed.;