SHEO PUJAN Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION AZAMGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the judgment of the Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 21 -7 -1983 allowing the revision filed by respondent No. 2 and setting aside the order passed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation as well as Consolidation Officer.

(2.) THE facts are that during consolidation proceedings chak Nos. 210 and 161 were carved out in favour of one Mangaru S/o Tulsi. He died in 1975. After his death petitioner moved an application under Section 12 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for mutation of his name as a legal heir claiming himself to be the brother of deceased Mangaru. Two more applications were filed; one by respondent No. 2 claiming mutation of her name as daughter of the/deceased and another by one Raghunath claiming himself to be the son of the brother of deceased. Both the aforesaid applications were moved on 24 -10 -1975. Undisputed pedegree of the parties is as follows : Tulsi Mangaru Sheo Pujan Kartallu Raj Kumari married Raghunath and others daughter, wife of Sakaldeep

(3.) I have heard Sri A.S. Diwekar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ranjit Asthana, learned counsel for the contesting respondent No. 2.