B.L. Yadav, J. - (1.) THIS petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the orders passed by the consolidation authorities.
(2.) THE facts in brief are that Under Section 9A(2) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act (for short the Act) the Petitioners filed an objection stating that Smt. Hakiman and Smt. Sharifan (in the pedigree given in para 2 of the petition) have remarried, hence their interest devolved upon the Petitioner Abdul Razzaq and he became the sole bhumidhar . The Petitioners' case was denied by Smt. Sharifan, Respondent No. 4, whereas Smt. Hakiman had died earlier and in her place Atiq, Respondent No. 5 was made party and he contested the case that Smt. Hakiman did not re -marry ; and in any case, she had deposited ten times rental and became bhumidoar along with the Petitioner and other co -tenure holders including Smt. Sharifan and had acquired bhumidhari rights under the provisions of U.P. Agricultural Tenants (Acquisition of Privileges; Act. She even much before her remarriage became bhumidhar to the knowledge of the Petitioner, who did not object nor he filed any objection, hence he was estopped from denying the same and in any case she acquired transferable interest and became full -fledged bhumidhar and alter her death her interest cannot devolve on the Petitioner.
(3.) THE consolidation authorities decided the case against the Petitioners and these orders have been challenged in the present petition.;