RAM NARAIN Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION KANPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ASHOK Bhushan, J. Heard Shri Shankata Rai, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri Nagendra Kr. Srivastava, learned Counsel appearing for respondent No. 4.

(2.) BY this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 25-2-1975 passed by Deputy Director of Consolidation and the order dated 15-1-1971 passed by Settlement Officer of Consolidation. Brief facts which emerge from the pleading of parties are:

(3.) AFTER the remand by the High Court, the Deputy Director of Consolidation vide his order dated 25-2- 1975 dismissed the revision of petitioner. The Deputy Director of Consolidation in his order observed that it is acceptable to both the counsels that land in dispute was acquisition of Raja Ram. The Deputy Director of Consolidation further held that adverse possession of the petitioner can at best be treated with effect from 1967 when sale deed was executed in his favour by Smt. Ganga Devi and since consolidation operation started in the village in 1969, the revision of the petitioner is liable to be dismissed. The Deputy Director of Consolidation further observed that respondent No. 4 Babu Ram cannot be held responsible for litigation started by Smt. Kailasa the mother of respondent No. 4 against Smt. Ganga Devi. It has further been observed that there is no evidence that there has been any litigation between respondent No. 4 and Ganga Devi after 1959 when Babu Ram attained majority. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order of Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 25-2-1975 as well as the order of Settlement Officer of Consolidation.