RAJAN ROY,J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State and Shri Sharvan Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 3.
(2.) This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the orders passed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation in Appeal No. 188 (Smt. Kukhna v. Lakshman and Anr.) under Section 11(1) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 dated 29.09.2016and the revisional order dated 25.05.2017 passed under Section 48 affirming the same.
(3.) The facts of the case in brief are that the land in question was recorded in the name of Bramha with Smt. Hansraji as co-tenure holder. After the death of Smt. Hansraji the name of Smt. Dukhna was recorded in her place as she was allegedly her daughter.;