S.K. Singh, J. - (1.) At the very outset, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that this very impugned order dated 13.10.1997 which is under challenge in this petition has already been quashed by this Court in number of writ petitions as by the impugned order, allotment as was made in favour of large number of persons by Bhudan Yagya Samiti on the basis of which, their names were directed to be recorded in revenue records, has been expunged. Learned Counsel submits that on the report of Addl. District Magistrate even without writing a single word, just by putting signature cancellation of entries in favour of large number of persons, has been approved.
(2.) In support of aforesaid contention, learned Counsel has placed reliance on a decision given by this Court in Smt. Shanti Devi v. District Deputy Director of Consolidation, 2003 RD 428 and two other orders passed by this Court in Writ Petition Nos. 41403 of 2003 and 31316 of 2003 decided on 26.2.2004 and 25.7.2003.
(3.) In view of aforesaid, after hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel, there being no dispute about the aforesaid fact, this Court proposes to decide this writ petition in the same terms and direction as is contained in the judgment of this Court referred above.;