RAM SWARUP Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners for quashing of the order dated 31.8.1981 (Annexure-2 to the petition) passed by the Additional Commissioner, Bareilly Division, Bareilly and order dated 9.7.1982 (annexure-3 to the petition) passed by the Board of Revenue and further for relief of writ of mandamus commanding the opposite parties not to interfere in the possession of the petitioners over the land in dispute on the basis of the impugned orders of opposite party now. 1 and 2 or on any other basis.

(2.) Brief facts giving rise to the present Writ Petition as stated by the petitioners are that plot no. 198 measuring 3.25 acres of village Naugawan, Pargana Pooranpur, District Pillibhit was recorded in the basic year khatauni at the time of consolidation in the name of Raghoubir Sahai. One Smt. Ram Dulari filed an objection under Section 9-A of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) cLalming 1/3rd share in the said plot on the basis of the family pedigree. The Consolidation Officer Rejected the objection of Smt. Ram Dulari. She preferred an appeal before the Settlement Officer Consolidation, which was dismissed on 1.3.1968, thereafter, the revision filed by her was also dismissed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation on 26.4.1968 and notification under Section 52 of the Act was made on 16.8.1969. Raghubir transferred the holding in suit on 26.8.1969 in favour of Data Ram, father of respondent nos. 3 to 7. Then she filed a review application before the Deputy Director of Consolidation which was allowed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation on 4.12.1969 and the case was remanded to the Consolidation Officer for deciding it afresh on merit.

(3.) It is stated that when the matter reached to the consolidation Officer, Data Ram, father of respondent nos. 3 to 7 filed application for impleadment, cLalming that Raghubir Sahai had sold the land in dispute to him on 26.8.1969, therefore he should be impleaded. Petitioner's contention is that the parties entered into compromise before the Consolidation Officer for deciding the case in terms of the compromise and before the Consolidation Officer, Data Ram, father of the respondent nos. 3 to 7 made a statement that as there has been a compromise in the case between smt. Ram Dulari and Raghubir Sahai, therefore, he does not want to say anything and his application for impleadment may be rejected. Accordingly, on the basis of the compromise dated 11.5.1970, Smt. Ram Dulari executed a sale deed in favour of the petitioners on 25.6.1971 and since then, the petitioners are in continuous possession. It is further stated that as Data Ram had threatened the petitioners to take possession of the land in dispute, therefore, the proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C. were started and was decided in favour of the petitioners.