Sudhir Narain, J. - (1.) That sole question before the Consolidation authorities was whether respondent No. 3 acquired rights by adverse possession over the land in dispute as against the petitioner.
(2.) In the basic year khatauni the petitioner was recorded as sirdar in respect of plot No. 447 of Khata No. 142. Respondent No. 4 filed an objection alleging that he had got the land from the father of the petitioner nearly 30 years ago and after Abolition of Zamindari he became sirdar of the land in dispute. The claim was contested by the petitioner. The parties led oral and documentary evidence. Respondent No. 3 led the evidence to show that he acquired the right by adverse possession. The Consolidation Officer by order dated 3-2-1975 rejected the claim of respondent No. 3 that he acquired rights by adverse possession. The Consolidation Officer directed to expunge the name of respondent No. 3 from the remarks column. Respondent No. 3 filed appeal before the Settlement Officer Consolidation who allowed the appeal vide order dated 6-8-1975 holding that respondent No. 3 acquired rights by adverse possession. The petitioner filed revision against the said order. Respondent No. 1 has dismissed the revision on 28-2-1980. The petitioner has challenged these orders in the present writ petition.
(3.) I have heard Sri S. N. Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri A. N. Verma, Counsel for the respondent.;