Shishir Kumar, J. - (1.) The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the orders dated 14.6.2000 and 6.5.2000 passed by opposite parties' No. I and 2 respectively and further prayer is for issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to interfere with regard to the petitioner's possession over the land in dispute.
(2.) The facts arising out of the present writ petition are that the petitioner was in possession over Land No. 61 area 0-2-6, No. 68 area 0-3-14. No 69 area 0-1-8 and No. 65 area 0-2-3 for the last 12 to 15 years. The petitioner filed Suit No. 1162 of 1998 in the Court of Additional District Magistrate under Section 229B and 209 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act).
(3.) Notices were issued and the concerned opposite party No. 4 entered into compromise and as such the suit was decided in terms of the compromise vide its judgment and decree dated 14.10.1998. Alter the compromise decree the name of the petitioner was recorded in the revenue record and the petitioner was in possession of the said land. For the reasons best known to respondent No. 4. he filed an application under Order IX Rule 13 C.P.C. before opposite party No. 2 for canceling the compromise decree dated 14.10.1998. The petitioner had no knowledge regarding filing of the aforesaid application and no notice was ever served upon the petitioner. Opposite party No. 2 passed an order on 6.5.2000 setting aside the compromise decree dated 14.10.1998 on an application filed by opposite party No. 4 under Order IX Rule 13 C.P.C. Opposite party No. 4 moved an application on 9.5.2000 for mutation of his name over the land in question. When the petitioner came to know, he filed an appeal before respondent No. 1 mentioning therein that the order dated 6.5.2000 is wholly illegal without service of notice and without sufficient service of the application under Order IX Rule 13 C.P.C.;