JOKHAN Vs. JOINT DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION ALLAHABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is against the judgment of the Joint Director of Consolidation Allahabad, dated 27-9-1976 whereby the revisibn petitions filed by the petitioners were dismissed.

(2.) Necessary facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that in the basic year Mahadeo, father of the contesting opposite parties Nos. 3 to 7. Mewalal, opposite party No. 8, and Moti Lal were recorded as Bhumidhars of the disputed land. The petitioners Nos. 1 to 3, namely Jokhan, Ram Naresh and Panchu, had claimed 1/4th share in the disputed land being trans-feree of Mewalal, Opposite Party No. 8.

(3.) The contesting opposite parties Kailash and others had contested the claim of the petitioners on the allegations that the names of Mewalal and Moti Lal were fictitiously recorded over the disputed land and that the contesting opposite parties were sole tenure holders and that the claim of the petitioners was barred by res judi-cata. The Consolidation Officer through his judgment dated 15-11-1971 had accepted the claim of the present peti-tioners and had held that the petitioner No. 4 Moti Lal, was entitled to l/4th share and the remaining 1/2 share was given to the contesting opposite parties. Aggrieved by the judgment of the Consolidation Officer the contesting opposite parties had preferred an appeal which was allowed by the appellate authority through its judgment dated 1-5-1972 and the contesting opposite parties were held sole tenure holders of the disputed land and the claim of the present petitioners was negatived as is evident from Annexure 2 attached to the writ petition. Thereafter the petitioners had preferred two revision petitions which have been dis- missed by the revisional court through the impugned judgment dated 27-9-1976 (Annexure 4 attached to the writ petition). Now the petitioners have approached this Court.