ALI SHER ALIAS SHER ALI Vs. HUSHMAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BINOD Kumar Roy, J. The petitioner prays to quash- (i) the appellate order dated, 11-6-1975 of the Settlement Officer (Consolidation), Deoria (Hatha) (Respondent No. 4) allowing appeal No. 435 preferred by the respondents Nos. ,1 to 3, (ii) the appellate order dated, 30-10-1975 of the Respondent No. 2 allowing Appeal No. 662 of respondent Nos. 1 to 3, and (iii) the revisional order, dated 19-8-1978 of the Assistant Director of Consolidation, Deoria, dismissing his Revision Nos. 306/383 and 307/783.

(2.) THE relevant facts are in a narrow compass. THE dispute between the petitioner and Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 relates to right, title and interest of the lands bearing Khata No. 124 of village Parsoni and Khata No. 326 of village Mahuni, district Deoria (now district Padrauna ). THE basic yearly entry of Khata No. 124 aforementioned was prepared in favour of respondent No. 1 Hashmat, respondent No. 2 Noor Mohammed, both sons of Sadiq, and Rahmat, son of Kudroo as sirdars at the time of Tasdiq of Khataunl Rahmat was found dead. THE petitioner Ali Sher alias Sher Ali claimed to be son and sole legal representative of Rahmat and prayed to expunge the name of Rahmat and enter his name as his heir. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 resisted the claim of the petitioner stating that he is resident of village Rampur Bagha and is son of Shantali. THE objections of the petitioner were registered as Case Nos. 1923 and 1924 of 1975, which were allowed, vide order, dated 19-10-1975 of the Consolidation Officer (copy appended as Annexure-1) holding as follows: (i) THE dispute raised by the opposite party Hashmat and others is wholly concocted and frivolous (ii) Sher Ali alias Ali Sher is heir of Rahmat deceased, (iii) Munshi is co-sharer of the disputed Khatas, (iv) Hashmat, noor Mohammad and Munshi are the sons of Sadiq who get l/2nd share and the remaining l/2nd share belongs to Sher Ali, son of Rahmat. While recording his finding' the Consolidation Officer took into account the statement of the petitioner, copy of the Kutumb Register Part-I of village Rampur Bagha, certificate; dated 4-9-1974 of the Regional Public Works Department, Deoria, the evidence of respondent No. 1 Hashmat, a witness Poojan, copy of Register Part-II in regard of Khata No. 45 of village Parsoni, voters' list of 1973 of village Parsoni, copy of Khatauni 1361 to 1362 Fasli if Khata No. 1214 of village Rampur Bagha, certified copy of registered sale-deed, dated 8-10-1975 executed by Halim and Sher Ali, son of Rahmat Ali copy of the complaint No. 625, Rojan v. Halim of the Court of Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Padrauna, executed by Smt. Bansi in favour of Halim and Sher Ali, SOIL of Shantali, copy of Khasra Barasala. THE Consolidation Officer, vide his order, dated 6- 11-1974 (as contained ' in Annexure-1-A) allowed the objection of the petitioner in regard to land being Khata No. 326 of village Modai, which was registered as Case No. 3876. Appeals were preferred, vide Annexure-3 and 3-A. THE petitioner went up in revisions which were dismissed by a common order as contained in Annexure- V. While dismissing the revisions of the petitioner following observations/findings were recorded - (i) THE petitioner has not produced any birth register either of village Parsoni of Rampur Bagh to clarity that a son born to Rahmat who could be connected with Sher Ali and no explanation has been furnished by him for not doing so. (ii) THE petitioner has also not clarified as to who is his she real mother if Rajli was his step mother. In the voters' list the age of Rajli has been mentioned as 34 years and the son. Sher Ali has been described as 27 years, which description was sought to be explained by the petitioner stating that Rajli was his step mother but this distinction does not appear to be convincing, (iii) THE petitioner has also not proved the certificate issued by the Public Works Department and accordingly no reliance can be placed on it. THE submissions:

(3.) I find merit in the submission of Mr Varma and accept them.