PARAMJEET SINGH, J. - (1.) Instant writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the orders dated 28.04.2011 (Annexure P-1), 09.08.2011 (Annexure P-2), 25.08.2011 (Annexure P-3) and 22.12.2004 (Annexure P-4) passed by the Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Tohana on the ground that the petitioners were cultivating as tenant under late Ram Takaya, father of respondents no.3 to 6 and after his death under his LRs, however, they have been ordered to be evicted from the land in dispute for non-payment of 'batai ?rd'' w.e.f 1994-1999.
(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently contends that impugned orders are not sustainable in the eyes of law. Learned counsel further contends that requisite amount has been deposited by the petitioners as is evident from order dated 06.09.2011 which reads as under: "Says that total Batai payable works out to be Rs. 1,09,000/- approximately by including the interest from the date it was payable. A sum of Rs. 23,320/- was deposited on 11.12.2003 by Zora Singh. Counsel contends that the petitioners are ready to deposit remaining amount of Rs. 75,000/-. They have brought this money in cash. Let this amount of Rs. 75,000/- be deposited by way of bank draft in the name of beneficiary today before the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court. Thereafter notice of motion be issued for 12.1.2012. Status-quo to be maintained in case the bank draft is deposited today." Learned counsel further contends that in view of above, possession cannot be taken. Neither respondents no.3 to 6 have any concern with the land in dispute nor they have filed any petition. Otherwise also, respondents no.7 and 8 have also no concern with the land in dispute. ;