RAM SURAT RAM (MAURYA), J. - (1.) HEARD Sri Anil Kumar Mishra, for the petitioners and Sri Shailendra Singh along with Sri R.K. Pandey, for the contesting respondent.
(2.) THE writ petition has been filed against the orders of Assistant Collector, dated 08.02.2010, Commissioner, dated 07.10.2011 and Board of Revenue, U.P., dated 11.09.2014, passed in suit under Section 229 -B of U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').
(3.) THE dispute relates to plots 41 (area 0 -16 -0 bigha), 288 -E (area 1 -8 -0 bigha), 294 -Ka (area 4 -2 -0 bigha) and 295 (area 0 -15 -0 bigha) of village Satauhan, tahsil Ghorawal, district Sonebhadra. Biggan (father of petitioners -1 to 3) filed a suit (registered as Suit No. 15 of 1986 -87) under Section 229 -B of the Act, on 10.11.1986, for declaring him and his brother Jiggan as bhumidhar with transferable right of the land in dispute. The plaint case was that the plaintiff and Jiggan were in continuous cultivatory possession of the land in dispute for last 20 years and acquired sirdari and thereafter bhumidhari right over it. Their names were also recorded in column 9 of the khatauni and in column 5 of the khasra. The suit was contested by Taulan (respondent -5). He filed his written statement and denied the plaint allegations. It was stated by the respondent that he was recorded tenure holder and had been in possession of the land in dispute. The petitioners were never in possession over it. In collusion with revenue authorities forged entries in column 9 of the khatauni and well as in column 5 of the khasra were made in favour of the petitioners. Assistant Collector (respondent -3) tried the suit. The petitioners filed khasras of the year 1380 F, 1382 F, 1383 F, 1384 F, 1385 F, 1386 F, 1388 F, 1389 F, 1390 F and 1391 F and khatauni 1369 F and 1388 -1389 F. The petitioners examined Radheshyam (petitioner -1) as witness. The respondent filed khatauni 1390 F, 1395 F and khasra 1397 F and 1399 F and examined himself and one witness Bhulan. Earlier Assistant Collector by his judgment dated 26.05.1997 decreed the suit. However, judgment dated 26.05.1997 was set aside by Additional Commissioner by judgment dated 18.07.2006 in the appeal filed by the respondent and the case was remanded to Assistant Collector to record a finding as to whether entries in column 9 of the khatauni as well as in column 5 of the khasra were made after following the procedure provided under the law. After remand, Assistant Collector by order dated 08.02.2010 found that the petitioners have failed to prove their continuous possession for 12 years over the land in dispute. After remand, the petitioners could not adduce continuous possession for 12 years over the land in dispute. After remand, the petitioners could not adduce any evidence to prove his plaint case and dismissed the suit.;