MANGAL SINGH Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION BULANDSHAHR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BHANWAR Singh, J. Both these writ petitions arise out of the same judgment dated November 28, 1992 passed by Sri Rajendra Goswami, Deputy Director (Consolidation), Bulandshahr.

(2.) BY filing Writ Petition No. 45710 of 1992, Mangal Singh and his two brothers have prayed for a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the two orders dated 16th July, 1991 and 28th November, 1992 passed by the Settlement Officer (Consolidation), Bulandshahr and the Deputy Director (Consolidation), Bulandshahr respectively. Further a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to disturb the peaceful possession over their respective share in land in dispute has also been prayed for.

(3.) MANGAL Singh and others pleaded in their petition that Hukum, MANGAL Surat and Jagdish had no right or interest in the land of Khata Nos. 122 and 251 as Hukum Singh's father Naval Singh had been adopted by his uncle Jauhari. The names of Pyare Lal, Mahendra, Dashraj, Shyadan, Kushal Singh, Dharam Pal Singh, Badri, Hukam Singh, Khajan, MANGAL, Suraj, Jagdish, Kale and Ram Singh were recorded as Bhumidars of Plot No. 122 in the Khatauni of the base year while the names of Hukam Singh, Khajan Singh, MANGAL, Jagdish and Suraj were recorded as Sankramaniya Bhumidhar. The Consolidation Officer rejected the plea that the names of Hukam Singh and others were wrongly recorded as tenure holders and held that the names of Hukam Singh, MANGAL, Suraj and Jagdish being rightly recorded as Bhumidars, they were entitled to have their shares in the disputed land. It was submitted before the Settlement Officer (Consolidation) that Hukam Singh's father Naval Singh had been adopted by his uncle Jauhari, as a consequence, none of his legal heirs in his branch would be entitled to have any share in the land in dispute, which was the property of the branch of Natuva. As a matter of fact, after the adoption of Naval Singh, Natuva became the sole owner of the disputed land.