VED PRAKASH Vs. DY. DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION, MUZAFFARNAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Arjun Singhal, for the petitioners and Sri Afaq Ahmad Ansari, for the respondents.

(2.) THE writ petition has been filed against the orders of Deputy Director of Consolidation (respondent -1) dated 26.12.2005, Settlement Officer Consolidation (respondent -2) dated 15.09.2004 and Consolidation Officer (respondent -3) dated 20.11.2002, passed in the proceeding, under Section 12 of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

(3.) THE applications of the respondents and Shabbir were registered as Case Nos. 146, 147, 148, 204, 205 and 206) under Section 12 of the Act. These cases were consolidated and heard by Consolidation Officer (respondent -3), who by order dated 21.01.1986, directed for mutating the names of Taj Mohammad and Sher Mohammad over the land in dispute. Thereafter, a time barred appeal (registered as Appeal No. 193/140) was filed from the aforesaid order, in the name of Aas Mohammad. Respondent -2 by order dated 10.01.1990 allowed the appeal and remanded the case to the Consolidation Officer for trail on merit and the parties were directed to appear before the Consolidation Officer on 21.01.1990. After remand, it is alleged that statements of Mahendra son of Ghasitu and Aas Mohammad son of Imam Ali were recorded on 21.07.1990 and 02.02.1991 respectively. However, according to the respondents, no such statement was ever recorded by Consolidation Officer, rather in collusion with the staff, fabricated statements of Mahendra and Aas Mohammad were placed on record. The respondents moved an application dated 16.12.1998, to recall Mahendra and Aas Mohammad for cross examination. This application was allowed by the Consolidation Officer by the order dated 18.02.1999 on the costs of Rs. 150/ and Mahendra and Aas Mohammad were directed to appear for cross examination on 10.03.1999. In spite of the order of Consolidation Officer dated 18.02.1999, Aas Mohammad was not produced for cross examination. The respondents, then moved an application to decide the validity of Power of Attorney dated 25.09.1986 allegedly executed by Aas Mohammad in favour of Jameer Hasan. The Consolidation Officer framed an additional issue on 25.01.2002 as to whether the Power of Attorney dated 25.09.1986, allegedly executed by Aas Mohammad in favour of Jameer Hasan was a forged document?