Rajan Roy, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by petitioners challenging the order of Deputy Director, Consolidation dated 25.10.2010 passed under Section 48 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act 1953'), as also the order of the Consolidation Officer dated 07.09.2009 passed under Section 9 of the Act 1953.
(3.) The facts of the case in brief are that the land in question i.e. Gata No. 81-A and 81-B was recorded in the name of Chauharja son of Badal. Ishwar Nath was the brother of Chauharja. Petitioners herein are the heirs and legal representatives of Ishwar Nath. According to the respondents Chauharja recorded tenure holder executed a sale deed in favour of Ram Sunder the husband of respondent no.4 and got it registered on 20.06.1970 in the office of Sub Registrar. It is said that Ram Sunder initiated proceedings for mutation of his name in respect of the land in question based on the aforesaid registered sale deed which was dismissed for non-prosecution on 28.01.1972. Thereafter another application was filed which is also said to have been dismissed for non prosecution as per the petitioners, but, as per respondent no.4 it was dismissed being second application. According to petitioners a third application was filed on 16.08.1974 which was dismissed as not maintainable, a fact which is denied by respondent no.4. Be that as it may, as these proceedings were for mutation of name and they being summary in nature they do not have much of relevance in the present case.;