Rakesh Sharma, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Siddharth Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri P.K.S. Paliwal, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.4 to 8. Sri Rajesh Kumar Chitragupt, Advocate, has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of proposed respondents, who have now been impleaded as respondent Nos. 9 to 12. Learned Standing Counsel represents respondent Nos. 1 to 3.
(2.) Through this writ petition, the petitioner has sought to assail the order passed on 24.1.2004, by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Ghaziabad, dismissing the revision, appellate order dated 28.4.2003, passed by the Settlement Officer, Consolidation, Ghaziabad and the order dated 14.11.2002, passed by the Consolidation Officer.
(3.) It is relevant to mention here that all the three Consolidation Courts, that is, the Consolidation Officer, Settlement Officer, Consolidation and the Deputy Director of Consolidation have recorded concurrent findings of fact in arriving at same conclusions that the agricultural land in dispute was acquired by a joint Hindu Family or a joint family of agriculturists for the purposes of the said family. The contesting parties were admittedly members of the same family (Khandan) and were living together in the same house. The admitted pedigree was also taken into account. The concurrent findings recorded by all the three Consolidation Courts have been challenged by this writ petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.;