Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Ratan Kant Sharma and learned counsel representing the respondent No.2, Dr. R.S. Pande.
(2.) These proceedings have been instituted under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the validity of the order dated 20.10.1997, passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Faizabad whereby the claim of respondent No.2 over the land in dispute has been accepted on the basis of the registered will deed executed by one Smt. Dharm Dei alias Dharma on 07.09.1978 in favour of respondent No.2-Fauzdar.
(3.) The facts of the case which can be culled out from the pleadings made by the respective parties which are available on record of this case, are that the basic year entry in the revenue records in respect of the land in dispute was in favour of one Sidhari, under the guardianship of his wife Smt. Dharm Dei alias Dharma.;