- (1.) HEARD Sri Ramesh Chandra, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State -respondents.
(2.) NONE has appeared on behalf of the contesting respondents.
(3.) THE writ petition arises out of an objection under section 9A (2) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the dispute initially pertained to two khatas, namely khata nos. 134 and 237 recorded in the names of respondent nos. 3 to 12 and their transferees in the basic year. The petitioner filed an objection claiming co -tenancy in the two disputed khatas on the ground that the land in dispute was the acquisition of Mangal, and in support of this contention the pedigree mentioned in the order of the Consolidation Officer has been relied upon.;