S.K. Singh , J. - (1.) These are two connected writ petitions which arises out of same judgment of Deputy Director, Consolidation and they having been already clubbed, both are to be disposed of by this common judgment.
(2.) Sri Khan, learned Advocate appeared in support of writ petition No. 7997 of 1981 and Sri R.C. Gupta in opposition thereof and thus in other connected writ petition both appeared on their respective side.
(3.) For better appreciation of facts and arguments, summary of the facts will be useful to be noticed. Writ Petition filed by Sri Khan is to be treated to be first writ petition. In the writ petition of Sri Khan, land comprised in Khata No. 56 is in dispute which was recorded in the basic year in the name of Jag Prasad, Gajua and Bhaiya Lai who is writ petitioner. In other writ petition filed by Sri Gupta, learned Advocate, land comprised in Khata No. 61 is in dispute which was recorded in the name of Swami Deen. Both sides filed separate objection under Section 9-A(2) of U.P.C.H. Act. Petitioner Jag Prasad claimed rights in the land comprised in Khata No. 61 on the basis of long possession which was accepted by all three Courts. At the same time, in the land comprised in Khata No. 56 Swami Deen applied for expunction of the name of Jag Prasad on the ground that his name has wrongly come on record and that was accepted by all three Courts and thus both sides, against concurrent judgments have come up to this Court.;