Ram Surat Ram (Maurya), J. - (1.) HEARD Sri Kamleshwar Singh, for the petitioners.
(2.) THE writ petition has been filed against the orders of Assistant Settlement Officer Consolidation dated 07.04.1979, Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 20.07.1981 and 05.08.2014, passed in title proceeding under U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The dispute relates to khata 196 [consisting plots 733/1 (area 0.543 hectare) and 734 (area 0.085 hectare)] of village Ahirupur, tahsil Ghosi, district Azamgarh. In basic consolidation year, land in dispute was recorded in the name of Murari (father of respondent -3) and names of Vindhyanchal and others (now represented by the petitioners) were recorded in column -9 of the khatauni. The petitioners filed an objection under Section 9 of the Act, on 29.09.1976 for recording their names over the land in dispute as sirdar. It has been stated by the petitioners that land in dispute was in possession of their ancestors since before date of vesting and they had become its sirdar.
(3.) THE case was tried by Consolidation Officer, who by his order dated 24.12.1977 dismissed the objected in respect of plot 734 and directed to delete entry of the names of the petitioners from plot 734 and allowed in respect of plot 733 and held them as sirdar of plot 733 (area 0.543 hectare). The petitioners did not file any appeal from the order of Consolidation Officer, in respect of plot 734. Murari and others filed an appeal (registered as Appeal No. 351) from the aforesaid order. The appeal was heard by Assistant Settlement Officer Consolidation, who by order dated 07.04.1979 found that so far as entry in khatauni 1359 F is concerned, Narain and Jagatu were recorded in column -20 of the khatauni as "occupiers of land without consent of the person recorded in column 5 of khasra" and in khatauni 1362 F, Narain and Jagatu were recorded as sirdar. Thus on the basis of being "recorded occupant", in 1359 F, sirdari right was claimed. For grant of sirdari right to a "recorded occupant", compensation under ZA Form -101, 110, 111 and 112 ought to have been prepared. The petitioners could not adduce any evidence to show that compensation role was prepared at that time. As such entry of 1359 F and 1362 F was not liable to be believed. So far as column -9 entry in khatauni is concerned, for the first time entry in column -9 was made in khatauni 1367 F, which contains an amaldaramad of the order of Supervisor Kanoongo dated 13.11.1959, recording the names of the petitioners in column -9. There is no evidence to prove that before making entry of column -9, procedure as given under Paragraph -A -81 of U.P. Land Records Manual was followed as such no reliance can be placed on it. On these findings appeal of Murari was allowed and entry of column -9 of the names of the petitioner on plot 733/1 (area 0.543 hectare) was directed to be deleted.;