Anjani Kumar Mishra, J. - (1.) THESE two writ petitions are directed against the same impugned order and have therefore been heard together and with the consent of the parties are being disposed of at the admission stage itself, without calling for any counter -affidavit. I have heard Shri Veer Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioners in both the writ petitions and Shri R.C. Singh and Shri H.R. Mishra, learned Senior Advocate for the respondents in these two writ petitions.
(2.) THESE writ petitions challenge the orders of the consolidation authorities passed in proceedings arising out of an objection under section 9 -A(2) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act as also the orders passed in proceedings under Rule 109 of the Rules whereby the orders passed in title proceedings have been given effect to. The dispute in the writ petition relates to plots of khata Nos. 89 -A, 89 -B, 90 and 238. These khatas were recorded in the name of Ram Nihal. On the start of consolidation operations, several objections were filed under section 9 -A(2) of the Act.
(3.) ON 26.9.1977, an additional issue was framed by the Consolidation Officer. This issue pertains to the question of res -judicata and the effect of decisions in a civil suit between the parties.;