S.D.Agarwal, J. - (1.) This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India arising out of consolidation proceedings.
(2.) The dispute in this case relates to plot Nos. 24 and 26 of Village Bairidih, Post Office Lalganj, District Azamgarh. The petitioners' claimed themselves to be the grove-holders of plots in dispute and consequently Bhumidhars. The consolidation authorities have rejected the case of the petitioners solely on the ground that the plots in dispute have been recorded as Bhita land and as such the petitioners do not acquire Bhumidhari rights.
(3.) In respect of the same village where a similar controversy was involved, two writ petitions namely, writ petition No. 5603 of 73, Abdul Quayum and others v. D.D.C. and others , and writ petition No. 5632 of 73, Anwar Ali v. A.D.C. and others , came up for hearing before Hon'ble R.M. Sabai, J. In that case also, in the revenue records the land in dispute was recorded as Bhita land. Hon'ble R. M. Sahai, J., after examining the law came to the conclusion that the mere fact that the land was recorded as Bhita land was not sufficient to determine whether a person acquires bhumidhari rights in the land or not. He held that it was further necessary to record a finding as to whether trees on the Bhita land were such in number that they precluded cultivation. These writ petitions were consequently allowed and the order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation was quashed and the matter was remanded.;