Shitla Prasad Srivastava, J. - (1.) This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the order dated 15.6.1994 passed by the Board of Revenue, which has been annexed as Annexure 5 to the writ petition.
(2.) The brief facts, as stated in the writ petition, are that a Suit No. 12 was filed under Section 209 of U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act and Section 64 of the U. P. Urban Areas Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act by the petitioner in respect of plot No. 4/20 area 2 bighas 10 biswa. It was alleged in the said plaint that land in dispute was recorded as bhumidhari land of the petitioner and the Guru of respondent No. 1 (Prabhu Das) has taken wrongful possession of the plot without any consent of the petitioner and without any authority of law and did not vacate the land hence the suit was filed.
(3.) The suit was contested by the contesting respondents that the land in dispute is not in the name of the plaintiff and the land in dispute is not situated as alleged in the plaint by the plaintiff. It was further alleged that the abadi has been built up and the defendant is in possession for more than 25-30 years without any interference and land is surrounded by the boundary wall as such, the suit is not maintainable in the revenue court. It is further stated the area 8 bighas 7 biswa of Khasra No. 4 has been given to the contesting defendant by the Zamindar, Mahant Sadhu, which is Khasra No. 4/22/2 and the defendant has purchased an area of 1 bigha 17 biswa of Khasra No. 10. The land is part of the said land of the defendant. It appears that the issue was framed as to whether the land in dispute has become abadi and the revenue court has no jurisdiction. This issue was referred to the Sub-Divisional Officer for decision under Section 331A of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act. The Sub-Divisional Officer while deciding the issue under Sections 143 and 144 of U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act asked for a report from the Tehsildar who submitted a report of the abadi land and non-abadi land and found 10 biswa 10 biswansi as abadi and rest of the land as agricultural land. On 20.1.1986, the Sub-Divisional Officer decided the issue and determined that 10 biswa land be declared as abadi and rest as agricultural land and further directed that the plaint be amended accordingly. Accordingly, the plaint was amended and the land in dispute remained confined to the area of 1 bigha 19 biswa 10 biswansi. The trial court while deciding issue No. 6 held that the disputed plot is neither abadi nor non-agricultural land, therefore, the revenue court has Jurisdiction to decide the issue. The trial court ultimately decreed the suit for ejectment against the contesting defendant vide order dated 20.1.1986. The defendant filed an appeal before the Commissioner against the order of the trial court. The finding was given by the lower appellate court that on the basis of the judgment of the trial court, the disputed plot is completely identifiable on the spot and defendant had no right over the same. The appeal was dismissed on 18.9.1991.;