RAM SAGAR CHOUDHARY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioners. No one appears for the private respondents although notices were duly served upon them and they have also filed Vakalatnama. Learned J.C. to AAG - 4 appears for the State -respondents.

(2.) THE petitioners seek quashing of the dated 5.5.2000, 22.10.1984 and 20.1.1984 passed by respondent nos. 2 to 4 by which all the aforesaid respondents have decided the matters against the petitioners.

(3.) AFTER lapse of 9 years from the earlier order passed in Consolidation. Case No. 9/1972 -73. respondent nos. 5 to 8 filed Consolidation Case No. 7686/1983 -84 without notice to the petitioners and the impugned order dated 20.1.1984 was passed. When the petitioners learnt about the said order, they filed appeal being Case No. 1357/83 -84 which was dismissed in default on 19.10.1984 and the restoration application filed on the same date was also dismissed on 20.10.1984. Subsequently, the petitioners filed Revision Case No. 3167/1989 before the Director, Consolidation but the same was also dismissed upon which the petitioners along with respondent no. 9 filed CWJC No. 371 of 1987 which was allowed by this Court and the matter was remanded back to the Director, Consolidation for consideration afresh on merit. Thereafter, the Director, Consolidation has passed the impugned order dated 5.5.2000 dismissing the revision application. The reasons stated in the said order are that in the revisional survey khatian the name of husband and father of the respondents have been entered and receipt has also been issued in their name till 1984 -85 and the mutation with respect to the deed of gift dated 4.11.1964 was done in the year 1971 which clearly show that the deed of gift was not acted upon and further it was held that the deed of gift was not acted upon for 18 years and thus, the Director, Consolidation has held that the revisional survey khatian entry should be maintained and has dismissed the revision application.