Ram Surat Ram, J. - (1.) SRI Umesh Kumar Srivastava has filed appearance on behalf of respondents -3 to 6. Heard Sri Pradeep Kumar Tiwari for the petitioners and Sri Virendra Pratap Yadav as well as Sri Umesh Kumar Srivastava for the contesting respondents.
(2.) THE writ petition has been filed against the order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 16.11.2013 and the Settlement Officer Consolidation dated 30.8.2013, in the proceeding arising under section 9 of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" In the basic consolidation record the names of Kaleshwar and Shyamlal sons of Parmeshwar and Ram Dulare and Kallu Prasad sons of Mahavir were recorded over Khata No. 113 of village Moharikala, pargana Mohanlalganj, district Lucknow. Parmeshwar has filed an objection under section 9 of the Act for deleting the names of Ram Dulare and Kallu Prasad from the land in dispute. It has been stated that the name of Parmeshwar was alone recorded in the previous consolidation also the names of his branch alone was maintained in the consolidation record. However, by making a forgery Mahavir and thereafter Ram Dulare and Kallu Prasad came to be recorded over the land in dispute. It is alleged that earlier the matter was decided in terms of the compromise by the Consolidation Officer by order dated 23.7.1984. However, that order was challenged and the compromise was set aside by order dated 18.8.1988 by the Settlement Officer Consolidation and the matter was remanded to the Consolidation Officer for deciding the case on merit and the revision filed by the petitioners has been dismissed by the order dated 28.12.1993. After remand the matter was decided by the Consolidation Officer who by order dated 3.1.2013 dismissed the objection of the contesting respondents and maintained the basic year entry. Against the order of the Consolidation Officer an appeal was filed by the contesting respondents. The Settlement Officer Consolidation by order dated 30.8.2013 found that the land in dispute was exclusively recorded in the names of Parmeshwar son Hemraj in khatauni 1360 fasli and in CH Form 23, prepared during the earlier consolidation the name of Parmeshwar alone was recorded over the land in dispute. However, in CH Form 45 the name of Mahavir was inserted in it by making overwriting and on its basis the name of Mahavir came to be recorded in khatauni 1372 -74 fasli also but in khatauni 1375 -77 fasli and 1378 -80 fasli the name of Parmeshwar alone was recorded in it. The petitioners also filed an application under section 33/39 of U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 for recording their names over the land in dispute which proceeding was ultimately abated. Therefore, in basic year entry the names of the petitioners were recorded by committing forgery in the previous consolidation record. On these findings the appeal filed by the contesting respondents was allowed and the order of the Consolidation Officer dated 3.1.2013 was set aside and the names of the petitioners were directed to be deleted from the land in dispute. The revision filed by the petitioners was also dismissed by the order dated 16.11.2013. Hence this writ petition has been filed.
(3.) THE Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners as well as the respondents belong to the same family and were descendants of Gangadeen. The land in dispute was the ancestral property as such branches of Parmeshwar as well as Mahavir, both have inherited the property in equal proportion. The name of Parmeshwar was directed to be recorded in the earlier consolidation proceeding and finding contrary to it is illegal.;