MANAU Vs. D.D.C. SITAPUR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the judgment dated 11.02.2002 passed by the Deputy Director Consolidation, Sitapur under Section 48 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953.

(3.) The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that in the earlier round of litigation, this Court while deciding Writ Petition No. 416 of 1993 had remanded the matter back only for the reason that the respondents herein who were the recorded tenure holders in the basic year Khatauni in respect of the holding in question, had asserted filing of a copy of the patta before the revisional court, which was not taken on record, but, on remand, the respondents did not file the original copy of the patta, on the basis of which, they claimed to have been recorded. It is further contended that yet the Consolidation Officer decided the matter in their favour, whereupon the petitioner filed an appeal before the Settlement Officer Consolidation, who rightly upturned the same, but the revisional court has upturned the order of the S.O.C. purely on conjectures and surmises without the patta having been proved.