JAIRAM Vs. ASSTT DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION JAUNPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is directed against the impugned orders passed by the Assistant Director of Consolidation and Assistant Settlement Officer, (C), Jaunpur.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the case are that Ram Lakhan Pathak, opp. party No. 3 was the bhumidhar of the land in question. He is said to have executed a sale deed dated 10-1-1972 in favour of Dharam Raj and Manik Raj, opp. parties Nos. 4 and 5 who, on the basis of the aforesaid sale deed, applied for the mutation under Sec. 12 of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, before the Assistant Consolidation Officer. The petitioners, Jairam and Rajdev also claimed to have purchased the same land in question from opp. party No. 3, Ram Lakhan Pathak, through another sale deed dated 12-8-1977. They filed objection under Sec. 12 of the said Act before the Asstt. Consolidation Officer. The Asstt. Consolidation Officer is said to have passed an order of mutation in favour of the petitioners on 8-2-1979. But no order of mutation was passed nor any action was taken by him on the earlier mutation application filed by opp. parties Nos. 4 & 5. When the opp. parties Nos. 4 and 5 came to know about the aforesaid mutation order, they applied to the Asstt. Consolidation Officer for passing mutation order in their favour, on their mutation application. This was rejected by the Asstt Consolidation Officer, vide his order dt. 19-3-79 saying that since he has already passed the mutation order in respect of the same land in question hence he cannot pass an order on the mutation application filed by opp. parties Nos. 4 & 5. He, however, directed them to file an appeal against the said order before the Settlement Officer (C). Thereafter the opp. parties Nos. 4 and 5 filed two appeals ; one, appeal was directed against the mutation order dt. 8-2-79 passed by the Asstt. Consolidation Officer in favour of the petitioners and another appeal was directed against the order dt. 17-3-79 by which the Asstt. Consolidation Officer rejected the application of the opp. parties Nos. 4 and 5. Both these appeals were heard together by the Assistant : Settlement Officer (C) and the same were allowed by him vide order dt. 13-8-79 awarding Rs. 20 as costs to the petitioners and the case was remanded to the court of Asstt. Consolidation Officer for a fresh decision on merits. Against this order the petitioners had filed two revisions before the Dy. Director of Consolidation under Sec. 48 of the Act which were heard by Asstt. Director of Consolidation, opp. party No. 1 and the same were dismissed on 13th Oct., 80 and the orders passed by the Settlement Officer (C) was maintained. It is against these two orders the petitioners have preferred this writ petition.