Krishna Murar, J. - (1.) By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the judgment and order dated 14.4.1977 passed by Deputy Director of Consolidation.
(2.) Briefly stated the facts are that the petitioner filed an objection under section 9 (2) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) claiming tenancy right in khata No. 50 on the ground that the said khata was ancestral and acquired from the time of common ancestor Mir Bux and his name should also be recorded. The petitioner set out following Geneology of the family. ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMITTED]...
(3.) It was pleaded in the objection that khata in dispute was acquired from the time of common ancestor Mir Bux and petitioner being son of Akbar was entitled to be recorded as co-sharer in the khata in dispute. The respondents contested the said objection on the ground that there was no person in the family known as Akbar and the petitioner is not related to the family. The Consolidation Officer vide order dated 7.3.1975 allowed the objection filed by the petitioner holding him to be a co-sharer in the property in dispute. Appeal filed before Settlement Officer, Consolidation by the opposite party Nos. 2 to 11 was also dismissed vide judgment dated 11.9.1975. Feeling aggrieved the contesting respondents preferred a revision before Deputy Director of Consolidation which has been allowed by the impugned order dated 14.4.1977.;