GANESHI LAL Vs. D D C AGRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri S.S. Chauhan, learned Counsel for the Petitioner.

(2.) This writ petition is taken up in the revised list but none appears for contesting Respondents though names of counsel for the Respondents are printed in the cause list. No counter-affidavit has been filed till date either by Gaon Sabha or contesting Respondents.

(3.) The dispute relates to plot No. 323 of village Balal. Tehsil Bah, District Agra. Petitioner's claim is that plot in question was in possession of his ancestors since 1309 Fasli and in support of his contention he has filed Annexures 1. 2, 3 and 4. When consolidation operation commenced, an objection under Section 9 of U.P.C.H. Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was preferred stating aforesaid facts before the Consolidation Officer. The Consolidation Officer rejected the claim of the Petitioner on the ground that since Respondents No. 2 was widow therefore, she comes within the definition of disabled person and the Petitioner cannot claim Adivasi right on the basis of the fact that he has been recorded in 1359 fasli. The Consolidation Officer accordingly dismissed claim of the Petitioner. Claim made by the Petitioner on the alternative ground of adverse possession was also not accepted by the Consolidation Officer. The Petitioner filed time barred appeal along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The Settlement Officer Consolidation condoned the delay but confirmed the order of the Consolidation Officer vide order dated 5.6.1987. Revision filed against the said order also stood dismissed vide order dated 10.10.1992. The revisional court was also of the view that since Respondents No. 2 died issueless, therefore, land in question vests in Gaon Sabha. All the three orders are impugned in the instant writ petition.