B.K. Sharma, J. - (1.) This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the orders of opposite parties Nos. 1 to 3 (Annexures No. 10,11 and 13 to the writ petition).
(2.) During the consolidation proceedings objections had been filed by the petitioner and certain others under Section 9 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act in respect of different plots. All the objections were taken up together and after recording evidence the Consolidation Officer rejected all the objections and held the land in dispute to be of the Gaon Sabha, a copy of the judgment dated 26.6.74 is Annexure-10 to the writ petition. The petitioner preferred Appeal No. 1285 and other objectors preferred separate appeals in respect of their respective plots as claimed by them. There were 12 appeals in all. The appeal relating to the present petitioner was Appeal No. 1285. The Settlement Officer Consolidation disposed of all the aforesaid appeals by a common judgment. All the appeals were dismissed by him vide his judgment and order dated 7.11.75 (Annexure No. 11 to the writ petition). The petitioner preferred Revision No. 2999 of 1976 against the said order dated 7.11.75 before the Deputy Director of Consolidation, (A copy of the revision application of the petitioner aforesaid is Annexure No. 12 to this writ petition). The other objectors, whose objections had been dismissed by the Consolidation Officer and whose appeals against dismissal of their objections had also been dismissed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation, preferred separate revisions before the Deputy Director of Consolidation. There were in all 12 revisions, out of those the revision relating to the present petitioner is Revision No. 2999 of 1976. The Deputy Director of Consolidation took up all the said revisions together and disposed of all the revisions by a common judgment and order dated 27.12.79, (A certified copy of this judgment dated 27.12.79 is Annexure No. 12 to this writ petition).
(3.) Before me the only argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that all the said objections were decided by the Consolidation Officer, Settlement Officer Consolidation and by the Deputy Director of Consolidation without considering the oral and documentary evidence. In the writ petition the plea raised in para 16 was that the Consolidation Officer and the Settlement Officer Consolidation did not appreciate the issues involved and the plea in para 18 was that the grounds taken in the memo of revision were argued before the Deputy Director of Consolidation, but he failed to grasp the import of the same and dismissed the revision of the petitioner. In the grounds taken in para 20 of the writ petition it was stated that the Consolidation Authorities did not refer to the evidence contained in Annexures No. I to IX and the oral evidence and arbitrarily held against the petitioner. Annexure No. I to the writ petition was a quarterly report submitted by Sri Rai Ras Behari Lal in respect of his Dairy Farm to the Government. Annexure No. II to the writ petition was a copy of the clarification of his pleadings by the petitioner. It is claimed that he filed true copies of Khasras for the years 1361 F and 1375 F (Annexures No. 3 and 4 to the writ petition) before the Consolidation Authorities and that he had examined various witnesses (copies of their statements are Annexures No. 5 to 9 to the writ petition).;