NAND LAL Vs. CHIEF REVENUE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Suresh Chandra Verma and Sri A.P. Singh, for the petitioner and Sri V.K. Chandel, for the respondents.

(2.) THE writ petition has been filed against the order of Chief Revenue Officer/Deputy Director of Consolidation (respondent -1) dated 16.09.2013, arising out of the proceeding under Section -12 of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act,1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

(3.) LEELAWATI , Ramata Devi and Lalati Devi (now represented by respondents -2 to 5) filed an application dated 09.08.1996 for recall of the order dated 22.02.1996. In this application, they stated that after death of Tilakdhari, they, being daughters of Tilakdhari, filed an application under section 12 of the Act, for mutating their names, on 30.01.1995, over the disputed land, which was referred by Assistant Consolidation Officer, by order dated 28.07.1995 to the Consolidation Officer for decision on merits. Both the applications i.e. one filed by the petitioner and other filed by them ought to have been consolidated and decided together. However, without issue of any notice to them, the order dated 22.02.1996 has been passed. Tilakdhari left behind him, five married daughters, namely Ramata Devi, Leelawati, Lalati Devi, Adalati Devi and Sheelawati Devi. However Sheelawati Devi was not heard from 12 to 14 years as such remaining four daughters were the heirs of Tilakdhari. When Nand Lal began to create hindrance in their possession over the disputed land then they made inquiry and came to know about the order dated 22.02.1996 on 08.08.1996. The recall application was filed on 09.08.1996.