R.H.ZAIDI,J. - (1.) IN the petitions since pure questions of law are involved and as desired by counsel for the parties, they are disposed of finally by common judgment.
(2.) (Sic) learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel Sri A. K, Varma and also perused the record. By means of these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioners pray for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quash ­ing the order dated 11 -9 -1995 and 15 -7 -1995. It appears that the proceedings under Section 198 of U.P Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act (for short the Act) were initiated against the petitioners, in respect of the land in dispute and order of ejectment dated 11 -9 -1995 was passed by the Chief Revenue Officer behind the back of the petitioner and without affording them an opportunity of hearing, holding that their pattas were farzi and it was not necessary to provide them an opportunity of hearing. The petitioners aggrieved by the orders dated 11 -9 -1995 filed a revision chal ­lenging the validity of the said order before the Commissioner of the Division, It was urged before the Commissioner that the order dated 11 -9 -1995 was passed behind the back of the petitioner and without af ­fording them an opportunity of hearing. The same was, therefore, liable to be set aside. The Commissioner did not attach any weight to the said argument and dismissed the revision vide his order dated 11 -9 -1995, which is quoted below :
(3.) CHALLENGING the validity of the aforesaid orders, present petitions were filed by tiu, petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently urged that the orders passed by the authorities below were illegal and manifestly erroneous. They were non -est in law as the same were passed in violation of provisions of Section 198 of the Act as well as in violation of principles of natural justice.;