SMT. UTTAMRAJEE Vs. D.D.C. & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HAVING heard Sri Kamleshwar Singh Learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri A.K. Roy for the respondents what emerges from the pleadings in the present writ petition as well as Writ Petition No. 19648 of 2006 that the parties are contesting over the existence of the orders that are said to have been passed allegedly for carrying out mutation in Case No. 1750 and 1756, the endorsement whereof is alleged to have been made in the Khataunis.

(2.) SRI Kamleshwar Singh submits that Ram Pati Singh died whereafter mutation was carried out on 2nd April, 1990. At that time there was no dispute pertaining to the said entry made earlier. Not only this, Smt. Uttam Raji, Ghurahu and Umrawati Devi executed sale deeds in the year 1992 and even at that point of time no such dispute was raised. It is only when Smt. Uttam Raji proceeded to execute a sale deed in 1998 that the entire dispute was raised and the complaints were made. It is on these complaints that the Settlement Officer Consolidation submitted his report on 13th August, 2001 and the Deputy Director of Consolidation proceeded to expunge the entries of 1978.

(3.) THE issue as to whether Case No. 1750 and 1756 had been conducted and are genuine cases would be dependent upon the fact as to whether they are found to be endorsed in the records maintaining the entry of such cases including the entries in the record room. The report of the Settlement Officer Consolidation also indicates that he had made enquiries from the record room. It is therefore obvious that there is a contradiction in the report of the Settlement Officer Consolidation dated 13.8.2001 and the information given from the record room on 14.7.2005 and 16.1.2006.