Anjani Kumar Mishra, J. - (1.) HEARD Shri T.K. Dubey, holding brief of Shri D.P. Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents. None has put in appearance on behalf of the respondents.
(2.) THIS writ petition arises out of an objection under section 9 -A(2) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act. The dispute pertains to plot No. 521/2, area 1.50 acres. In the basic year record the father of the petitioner was recorded over the land in dispute while the contesting respondents were recorded in column No. 9 of the Khasra. The objection, therefore, was preferred by the father of the petitioner for expunging the entry in favour of the respondents. The Consolidation Officer by his order dated 23.2.1976 dismissed the objection while the objection filed by the contesting respondent was allowed and they were held as Sirdar of land in dispute. This order has been affirmed by the appellate as also the revisional Court.
(3.) IT is the case of the petitioner that in 1949, the parties had entered into a compromise in a suit under section 59 of the U.P. Tenancy Act whereby the petitioner's father was held entitled to half share in plot No. 521 having a total area of 3 acres. It is further the case of the petitioner that his father thereafter executed a gift deed in his favour in 1968 and the petitioner was thereafter recorded over the land in dispute in the revenue record on the basis of such gift deed. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the compromise decree in the suit under section 59 of the U.P. Tenancy Act was binding upon the parties and in holding to the contrary the Consolidation Officer has committed manifest error.;