Ram Surat Ram (Maurya), J. - (1.) HEARD Sri K.N. Shukla, for the petitioner and Sri Vijay Kumar Ojha, for the caveator respondent -4. The writ petition has been filed against the orders of Consolidation Officer dated 6.11.2011, Settlement Officer Consolidation dated 27.1.2010 and Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 17.1.2015 passed in proceeding under section 9 -A(2) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).
(2.) THE dispute relates to plot 84 of village Barhadpur, pargana Mohammadabad Gohna, district Mau. In basic consolation year, an area of 7 kari of plot 84 was recorded in khata 4, an area of 10 kari was recorded in khata 294 (banjar), an area 153 kari was recorded in khata 237 (in the name of Jharkhandi, now represented by the petitioner and respondents -20 to 27), an area of 93 kari was recorded in khatas 152 and 279 kari was recorded in khatas 13 (khatas 4, 13 and 152 were recorded in the names of Amar and his co -sharers, respondents -4 to 19) (hereinafter referred to as the respondents). Amar filed four objections, before Settlement Officer Consolidation, who entertained it, exercising powers under section 44 -A of the Act, for correction of area as recorded in CH Form -5 of plot 84, in various khatas. Later on, Settlement Officer Consolidation by order dated 12.1.2001, remitted the objections to Consolidation Officer for deciding on merit, where it were registered as Case Nos. 2150, 2151, 2152 and 2153. In basic consolidation year, name of Jharkhandi alone was recorded over khata 237. Patiram and sons of Satiram (respondents -20 to 27) filed an objection (registered as Case No. 212 of 1996) for recording their names as co -sharers of 1/3 share over the land in dispute. The petitioner claimed for recording her name over 1/3 share of Jharkhandi on the basis of sale -deed executed by him in the year 1982. Surendra, Virendra and Jitendra claimed 1/3 share of Mahadev also on the basis of his sale -deed of the year 1978. Case No. 212 was summoned by Settlement Officer Consolidation as stated in paragraph -6 of recall application (filed as Annexure -8). Aniruddh (respondent -4) filed a counter -objection in Case No. 212 on 19.6.2001.
(3.) CONSOLIDATION Officer by order dated 23.10.2001 consolidated Case No. 212 along with Case Nos. 2150 etc. Consolation Officer, by order dated (sic).11.2001 held that plot 84 was made from old' plot 167. In 1356 -F an area of 379 kari was recorded in the names of the respondents in different khatas. In khasra 1356 -F plot 167/1 (area 374 kari) was recorded as grove of the respondents and plot 167/2 (area 100 kari) was recorded in occupation of Jharkhandi and others. In khatauni 1359 -F an area of 374 kari of plot 167 was recorded in various khatas of the respondents and an area of 100 kari was recorded in the names of Jharkhandi, Pakhandi and Mahadeo. In previous consolidation old plot 167 was renumbered as plot 84 as proved from CH Form -41. However in CH Form 45, an area of 153 kari of plot 84 was recorded in the names of Jharkhandi, Pakhandi and Mahadeo, which was recorded in basic consolidation year in the name of Jharkhandi. Total area of plot 167 was recorded in 1356 -F as 374 kari. However in 1359 -F 474 kari was recorded and in basic consolidation year it was recorded as 284 kari. As 1359 -F an area of 100 kari was recorded in the names of Jharkhandi and others as such same area was liable to be recorded in their names. As no objection was filed against khata 294 (banjar) as such no change was recorded in khatas 4, 152 and 294. Excess area was liable to be recorded in khata 13. Share of Tara Devi was 1/3 in khata 237, Patiram as 1/6 and sons of Satiram as 1/9 each.;