S.K.SINGH, J. - (1.) CHALLENGE in this petition is the judgment of Joint Director Consolidation and Assistant Settlement Officer Consolidation dated 8 -8 -1980 and 6 -4 -1978 (Annexure Nos. 4 and 3 to the writ petition respectively).
(2.) WHEN the matter was taken up, the Court found something peculiar as there was report of Stamp Reporter that the limitation to file this writ petition was up to 6 -11 -1980 and thus there is delay of 23 years and 328 days. In view of the aforesaid, learned counsel for the petitioners who has filed this writ petition was called upon to argue on the question of filing of this writ petition not only after inordinate delay and the laches but after unusual laches. Learned counsel for the petitioners on the basis of certain averments as made in the writ petition tried to explain the laches in filing this writ petition. At this stage certain admitted facts which comes out on a perusal of the averments of the writ petition and the material as exist on the record will be useful to be noticed. Admittedly against the impugned judgments dated 8 -8 -1980 and 6 -4 -1978 a writ petition was filed before this Court i.e. writ petition No. 9133 of 1980 which was entertained and that remained pending up to the year 2003. In the aforesaid writ petition admittedly the present petitioner No. 2 Jai Narain was petitioner No. 3. Two other persons namely Mata Deen and Data Deen who are respondents 10 and 11 here were petitioners 1 and 2. Ram Narain, petitioner No. 1 in this petition was arrayed as respondent No. 4 in the earlier writ petition. The writ petition referred above was finally heard and decided by this Court on the merits by speaking order dated 29 - 10 -2003 and the writ petition was finally dismissed.
(3.) COUNSEL for the petitioners submits that in fact Jai Narain who was petitioner No. 3 in the earlier writ petition was misled by Mata Deen and Data Deen who were the co -petitioners in the said petition. He was under the impression that they are doing proper pairvi in the matter but in fact petitioner was bluffed by them and thus he could not place correct/complete facts resulting into dismissal of the earlier writ petition, submission is that after dismissal of the earlier writ petition, petitioners have realised the things and now they are filing this writ petition with the hope that their claim on merits will be examined and accepted.;