PRADYUMAN Vs. YASHVEER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners have invoked the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226/227 of The Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorari quashing the orders dtd. 29/11/2007, 12/11/2008 and 31/5/2011 (contained as annexure nos.6, 7 and 9, respectively).

(2.) Factual background of the case is that the father of petitioner no.3 namely Ghaseeta filed objections under Sec. 9-A of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act. The Assistant Consolidation Officer, by order dtd. 7/9/1992, partitioned Khata No.57 on the basis of shares of the parties. Subsequently, father of the petitioners filed appeal before the Settlement Officer Consolidation, who on the basis of compromise, decided the appeal vide order dtd. 1/11/1993. The opposite parties filed restoration application for recall of order dtd. 1/11/1993 on the ground that the compromise was obtained by playing fraud. Petitioners' father filed objections to the said restoration application. The Settlement Officer Consolidation vide his order dtd. 23/2/1998 allowed the restoration application, whereagainst petitioners' father filed a revision. Deputy Director of Consolidation, vide order dtd. 20/8/1998, dismissed the revision. Further aggrieved, father of petitioner no.3 approached the Allahabad High Court and filed a civil misc. writ petition no.29114 of 1998. Hon'ble Allahabad High Court, by its judgment dtd. 10/9/1998, dismissed the appeal with the observation that the Settlement Officer Consolidation shall decide the appeal expeditiously. Thereafter, the Settlement Officer Consolidation, vide order dtd. 17/3/2001, decided the appeal and set-aside the order dtd. 7/9/1992 and remanded the case to the Consolidation Officer, Roorkee to decide the matter after giving full opportunity of hearing to the parties. After remand, the Consolidation Officer, by its judgment and order dtd. 16/10/2001, decided the case and it was directed that the gata no.42 of khata Khatauni no.57 shall be divided as khasra no.42/2 area 2.9043 hectare (orchard) in the share of Balbir Singh and Hirderam S/o Chajju and khasra no.42/1 area 1.000, 42/3 area 0.4150, 42/4 area 0.5200, 42/5 area 0.0100 and 42/6 area 0.0100, total area 2.8430 hectare, shall be recorded, as earlier, in the shares of Ghaseeta Singh. Subsequently, father of petitioner no.3 filed an application before the Consolidation Officer, Roorkee, under Rule 109 stating that the record be corrected according to the order dtd. 16/10/2001. On the application so moved, a reference was made by Assistant Consolidation Officer which was registered as reference suit no.73 Ghaseeta and others vs. State. Consolidation Officer observed that the reference no.231 u/s 48(3) dtd. 12/7/1995 has been prepared as per order dtd. 1/11/1993 and in pursuance to said reference, record has been prepared, and accordingly, dismissed the application filed by the petitioners, vide order dtd. 29/11/2007. Feeling aggrieved, petitioners filed appeal. Settlement Officer Consolidation, vide its order dtd. 12/11/2008, dismissed the appeal. Thereafter, the petitioners preferred revision before Deputy Director of Consolidation, which also got dismissed vide order dtd. 31/5/2011.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the record of Consolidation Case No.220 of 2001.