LAWS(ALL)-2014-1-406

GHARIB AHSAN Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION

Decided On January 13, 2014
Gharib Ahsan Appellant
V/S
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Qamar Ahmad, learned counsel for petitioners and Sri U.K. Srivastava, learned counsel for contesting respondents.

(2.) THIS writ petition arises out of consolidation proceedings pertaining to title. Smt. Karima Bibi (since deceased and survived by her sons, the petitioners) filed objections before Consolidation Officer (C.O.), Hardoi on 26.12.1967. The C.O. rejected the objections on 30.07.1967. Against the said order, Smt. Karima Bibi filed appeal, which was allowed by Settlement Officer Consolidation (S.O.C.), Hardoi on 29.02.1968 holding that Smt. Karima Bibi was joint grove holder of plot No.290, area 2 bighas and 2 biswas to the extent of 3/8th share along with opposite parties No.4 to 6. Against the judgment of S.O.C. contesting opposite parties filed revision, which was dismissed by the D.D.C. on 15.01.1970. However the said judgment was set aside by this court through judgment dated 12.09.1973 passed in Writ Petition No.335 of 1970 and the matter was remanded to the D.D.C. to decide the revision afresh in the light of the observations made in the body of the judgment. Copy of the earlier order passed by this court on 12.09.1973 is Annexure -8 to the writ petition. The writ petition was allowed without hearing any one on behalf of Karima Bibi, congesting respondent therein. She filed an application for rehearing, which was dismissed on 29.10.1975.

(3.) SMT . Karima Bibi died on 10.11.1978. On 09.05.1979, petitioners, who were revisionists in the revision before the D.D.C. filed substitution application, which was allowed on 30.10.1979. Thereafter, D.D.C., Hardoi through order dated 22.01.1980 passed in Case No.78 (renumbered several times thereafter, the last number being 34) allowed the revision, set aside the order of the S.O.C. and restored the order of C.O. The said order dated 22.01.1980 has been challenged through this writ petition. The order of the D.D.C. allowing substitution application dated 30.10.1979 has also been challenged.