FAUZDAR ALI Vs. D.D.C.BAHRAICH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 02.05.1998 passed by the Deputy Director Consolidation under Section 48 by which he has allowed the revision of the opposite party no. 2 and 3 and has set aside the order of the Consolidation Officer and the Settlement Officer Consolidation, thereby accepting the claim of the opposite party no. 2 and 3 regarding co-tenancy rights.

(2.) The case at hand has a chequered history. In the first consolidation operation's the name of Mohabbat Ali and Sohabat Ali was recorded in respect of the land in dispute. An objection was filed by Museebat Ali and Rahmat Ali which was allowed by the Consolidation Officer and title based on adverse possession of Museebat Ali and Rahmat Ali was accepted by the order dated 29.09.1964. This order was however set aside in appeal by the order of SOC dated 26.12.1964. The revision of Museebat Ali and Rahmat Ali was also dismissed by DDC on 25.11.1966. Two writ petitions were filed in this regard bearing no. 161 of 1967 and 204 of 1967 both of which were dismissed on 29.09.1970 and 09.11.1970 respectively. Thus, the claim of Museebat Ali and Rahmat Ali came to an end. Both the writ petitions were by Museebat Ali and Rahmat Ali but in one Sohabat Ali was arrayed as an opposite party and in the other Mohabbat Ali, Sohabat Ali and Usmaan Ali, all three were arrayed as opposite parties.

(3.) It is an admitted factual position that the aforesaid order's passed during consolidation operation's were not given effect in the final records, as a consequence of which names of Museebat Ali and Rahmat Ali which had been recorded based on the order of the Consolidation Officer passed on 29.09.1964 continued to be recorded and the name of aforesaid three brother's could not be recorded.