- (1.) Heard Sri Madan Mohan, along with Sri P.S. Verma for the petitioners and Sri S.M.A. Abdy, along with Sri Ajeet Kumar Yadav for the respondents.
(2.) The aforesaid writ petitions have been filed against the order of Board of Revenue, U.P. Dated 24.1.2011, allowing the revision and setting aside the order of Commissioner dated 21.5.2010 and reinstating the order of SDO dated 1.4.2010.
(3.) On the application of Mulayam Singh, respondent-4, proceeding u/s 198(4) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') was initiated for cancellation of patta of the petitioners. Initially, the application was filed before SDO, but subsequently, Mulayam Singh moved an application for transferring the application to the Collector, which was allowed by Collector and the case was transferred to Additional City Magistrate. Thereafter, Mulayam Singh filed another application u/s 192 before the Commissioner for transferring the case from Additional City Magistrate to the Court of Collector. Commissioner by order dated 20.10.2009 transferred the case to the Collector. When the case was taken up before the Collector, the petitioners raised an objection and requested to send the case to SDO, but the Collector by order dated 2.7.2009 rejected the objection of the petitioner. Thereafter, one of the petitioners filed a revision (registered as Revision No. 201 of 2009/09), which was allowed by Member, Board of Revenue by order dated 3.9.2009 and the matter has been transferred to SDO for deciding the case. After remand, the case was tried by SDO. The parties were allowed to adduce their evidence. The petitioners contested the case and adduced their evidence. SDO has recorded statement of various allottees as well as complainant and Lekhpal of the village. From the statement of various witnesses recorded before the SDO, it appears that the land in dispute has already been allotted to Smt. Mundra Devi on 1.7.1963, Vijay Pal on 1.7.1964 and Smt. Kesar Devi on 3.7.1968 and they were in possession over the land in dispute. Without taking due publication, the Pradhan has initiated fresh allotment proceeding on 25.2.2004, which has been accepted by Tahsildar on 29.2.2004, but on the basis of this allotment, the allottes were not given possession over the land allotted to them. Since the land in dispute was not vacant, as such, fresh allotment of the land in dispute was illegal. SDO therefore allowed the application and cancelled the patta of the petitioners by order dated 1.4.2010. The petitioners challenged the aforesaid order in revision, which was heard by Commissioner, who by the order dated 7.6.2010, held that u/s 198(4) of the Act, the Collector is the appropriate authority for deciding the application for cancellation of patta. The order passed by SDO is totally without jurisdiction. On this finding, he allowed the revision and set aside the order of SDO dated 1.4.2010 and remanded the matter to the Collector for deciding the case afresh. The aforesaid order was challenged by the respondents in revision before the Board of Revenue. Board of Revenue by the impugned order dated 24.1.2011 held that as the matter has been transferred on the application of the petitioner to SDO for deciding it on merit, as such, the petitioner again cannot question the jurisdiction of SDO and the order passed by SDO cannot be said to be without jurisdiction. On this finding, the revision was allowed and the order of Commissioner was set aside and the order of SDO was reinstated. Hence, this writ petition has been filed.;