SITA RAM AND ANR. Vs. DY. DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution arises out of proceedings under the UP Consolidation of Holdings Act. It prays that the orders dated 21 -12 -1965 and 7 -1 -1966 passed by the Consolidation Officer and the order dated 21 -4 -1966 passed by the Dy. Director of Consolidation be quashed.

(2.) ONE Nand Ram was the occupancy tenant of three holdings Nos. 157, 241 and 338. He died in or about 1952 leaving a widow Mst. Mukandi. The widow also died on or about July 1958. The Petitioners Sita Ram and Lotan Singh are the sister's son of Nand Ram. Respondent No. 3 Hukam Singh is the son -in -law of Nand Ram. Bijendra Singh, Respondent No. 4, claims to be the daughter's son of Nand Ram. On the death of Nand Ram's widow Mukandi in 1958, disputes arose as to succession. Several litigations were fought out between the parties, but during their pendency proceedings under the UP Consolidation of Holdings Act commenced. At this time, the revenue records showed that over holding No. 157, Smt. Mukandi, the widow of Nand Ram, was entered as a bhumidhar. She was entered as a sirdar over holding No. 338. Holding No. 241 (excluding plot Nos. 1041 and 1042) was entered in the name of Hukam Singh. Hukam Singh had transferred plot Nos. 1041 and 1042 in favour of Respondent Nos. 5 to 11 and as such these Respondents were entered over plot Nos. 1041 and 1042 of holding No. 241.

(3.) SEVERAL dates were fixed for hearing on some of which parties led evidence, documentary as well as oral. Ultimately 21 -12 -1965 was fixed for hearing. The Petitioners were not present. Respondents Hukam Singh and Bijendra Singh were present. The Consolidation Officer dismissed the objection of the Petitioners ex parte. The Consolidation Officer observed in his order that Hukam Singh has stated that Bijendra Singh be recorded as a co -tenant in the three holdings. He, therefore, ordered that the name of Bijendra Singh be recorded over the three holdings.