PARAS NATH Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION BASTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is directed against the orders passed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation and the Deputy Director of Consolidation. It was claimed on behalf of the opposite parties that they were the sole bhumidhars of the grove in dispute. It has been found by the Consolidation Officer that plot nos. 1/1, 1/2, 1/3 and 1/4 were entered as grove in Khewat of 1292F and 1323F. as 'Bagh Malkan'. The Consolidation Officer accepted this entry and directed petitioner to be recorded as co-grove holder. The subsequent entries as Khudkasht over the land in dispute were disbelieved by him as they did not depict the correct state of affairs as admittedly the land in dispute being grove could not be held as Khudkasht. The appellate court on the other hand allowed the appeal merely on the ground that the land was entered as Khudkasht of the opposite parties although it was found by him that trees were planted over the land in dispute and they were in the shape of grove.

(2.) THE finding recorded by the re-visional court that the opposite parties were the sole Khudkasht holder is not based on any evidence. It being admitted that the land in dispute was ancestral grove and was entered as 'Bagh Malkan' in 1292F. and 1323F. the Consolidation Officer was justified in directing the petitioner to be recorded as co-grove holder. THE orders of the appellate court and the revisional court therefore being based on no evidence are liable to be quashed.