- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri Gopal Krishna Pathak, lerned counsel representing the State-respondents.
(2.) These proceedings instituted under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenge the order passed by the Consolidation Authorities in proceedings under section 12 of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, which had open on the death of one Gouri Datt. On the death of the deceased tenure holder-Gouri Datt, two sets of objections were filed, one by Jokhan and Ayodhya, who are the predecessor in interest of the petitioners and the other by Smt. Surya Pali, who claimed the land in question as sister of Gouri Datt. The Consolidation Officer on the basis of pleadings available before him framed certain issues.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners has stated that there being no application filed by Surya Pali under section 12 of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, her case could not have been considered. He has also submitted that in view of the order dated 19.12.1977 passed by the Assistant Consolidation Officer, the Consolidation Officer could not have passed the impugned order dated 29.02.1980 as it was not open to him to have set aside the order dated 19.12.1977 passed by the Assistant Consolidation Officer, which was passed on the basis of compromise in presence of two members of the Consolidation Committee. He has further stated that the predecessor in interest of the petitioners, namely, Jokhan and Ayodhya were thus entitled to succeed the land in question being the successors of the deceased tenure holder, Gouri Datt.;