RAJIV SHARMA,J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that before the consolidation operation, in basic year, plot No. 220 consisted of two sub-divisions, i.e. 220/1 area 1-10-0 and plot No. 220/2 area 4-10-0. During the consolidation operation, Alim Khan, father of the petitioner filed objections under Section 9 of the Act in respect of plot No. 220/2 area 4-10-0 with the allegations that the plot in dispute is uncultivated land over which trees of Tad, Khajoor, Babool, Neem, Kait etc. are standing and is in his possession. One Ram Lakhan also filed objections claiming Sirdari rights in respect of the same land. The Consolidation Officer rejected the objections of the petitioner by the order dated 13.9.1973. Being aggrieved, Alim Khan filed an appeal No. 155 against the aforesaid order of Consolidation Officer dated 13.9.1973 before the Assistant Settlement Officer, Consolidation, who, in turn, partly allowed the appeal filed by Alim Khan that out of total area of plot No.220 4-10-0, Alim Khan, S/o Doman be recorded over 3 biswa land towards North as Sirdar and so far the remaining area 4-7-0 was concerned, claim of Alim Khan was rejected. Against the order passed by the Assistant Settlement Consolidation Officer, two revision Nos. 3309 and 3310 were filed - one by Alim Khan and the other by Ram Lakhan. The Deputy Director of Consolidation, vide order dated 9.10.1980, partly allowed the Revision No. 3309 of Alim Khan and remanded the case to the Assistant Settlement Officer, Consolidation to decide afresh in respect of remaining area 4-7-0 of plot No. 220 and dismissed the Revision No. 3310 filed by Ram Lakhan. Being aggrieved, Ram Lakhan filed Writ Petition No. 11965 of 1981 in this Court challenging the order dated 9.10.1980. This Court dismissed the said writ petition by means of the order dated 16.11.1998 with the finding that the order passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation is only a remand order, therefore, the writ petition is not maintainable. However, this Court did not record, any finding with regard to the forgery alleged to have been committed by Ram Lakhan.
(3.) ON remand, the Assistant Settlement Officer, Consolidation dismissed the appeal filed by Alam Khan vide order dated 22.3.2002. Alim Khan filed Revision against the order passed by the Assistant Settlement Officer Consolidation. By means of the order dated 5.4.2005, the Deputy Director of Consolidation dismissed the aforesaid Revision filed by Alam Khan.;