VIJAY KUMAR SINGH Vs. TULSA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri U.S. Sahai for the petitioner and Ms. Madhurima Bhargava for the contesting respondents. The writ petition has been filed against the orders of Assistant Settlement Officer, Consolidation dated 18.5.2004 by which the appeal has been allowed and the matter has been remanded to the Consolidation Officer for impleading Gaon Sabha as opposite party in the objection filed by the petitioner and respondent -1 and for framing fresh issues and to decide the case after giving opportunity of evidence to the parties and the order of Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 20.6.2006 dismissing the revision of the petitioner against the aforesaid order.

(2.) The dispute between the parties was in respect of khata Nos. 109 and 915 of village Kooknagar Grunt, pargana Budhapur, tehsil Mankapur, district Gonda. In the basic consolidation record the names of Vijai Kumar Singh and Smt. Shobhawati were recorded over khata Nos. 915 and 109. However, plot No. 11024, area 21 decimal and plot No. 11031 area 13 decimal of khata No. 915 the possession of Smt. Tulsa Devi was recorded. The parties filed their objections before the Consolidation Officer. The case of the petitioner is that the land in dispute was originally belonged to Sheetala Bux Singh. The petitioner is daughter's son of Sheetala Bux Singh as such he has inherited the land in dispute. On the other hand the case of Smt. Tulsa Devi respondent -1 is that she was daughter of Sheetala Bux Singh as such she was preferential heir. The Consolidation Officer framed necessary issues and after giving opportunity of evidence to the parties by order dated 18.6.2003 dismissed the objection of Smt. Tulsa Devi and also directed for deleting her name and possession from the record over plot Nos. 11024 and 11031 and directed for recording the names of the petitioner over the land in dispute. The aforesaid order was challenged in appeal by Smt. Tulsa Devi. The appeal was heard by the Assistant Settlement Officer, Consolidation, who by the impugned order dated 18.5.2004 found that the Sub Divisional Officer in the order dated 6.9.1994 and Additional Commissioner in the order dated 26.11.1975 found that Smt. Tulsa Devi was daughter of Sheetala Bux Singh. After the death of Sheetala Bux Singh the name of Smt. Shobhawati was recorded on the basis of report under PA -11 -A as an heir of Sheetala Bux Singh over the land in dispute. The Consolidation Officer has not impleaded Gaon Sabha as opposite party in the objection and decided the matter. Thus, on this finding, he allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the Consolidation Officer dated 18.6.2003 and remanded the matter to Consolidation Officer for impleading Gaon Sabha as opposite party and deciding the objection after framing fresh issues and opportunity of evidence to the parties. The petitioner challenged the aforesaid order in the revision before the Deputy Director of Consolidation, which has been dismissed by the order dated 26.6.2006 holding that the revision was filed against the order remand and no interference is required by the said authority. Hence, this writ petition has been filed.

(3.) The Counsel for the petitioner submits that before the Consolidation Officer both the parties were appearing and contested the matter. They led their evidence. The petitioner is claiming to be daughter's son of Sheetala Bux Singh and nearest heir. On the other hand Smt. Tulsa Devi is claiming to be daughter of Sheetala Bux Singh as preferential heir. Thus, it was nobody's case that there was no one left by Sheetala Bux Singh to inherit the property and the property would be vested in Gaon Sabha. In the objection of the petitioner impleadment of Gaon Sabha was not called for as Gaon Sabha had not filed any objection. In any case the consolidation authorities are themselves competent to watch the interest of State of U.P./Gaon Sabha under Sec. 11 -C of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). Therefore, remand on this ground was uncalled for.