IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3794 OF 2001 (M/S) Jabar Singh ……………..Petitioner. Versus The Joint Director of State of Uttaranchal & and others. ……..…..Respondents. 13.8.2008 Hon’ble P.C. Verma, J. Mr. M.S. Tyagi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. H.M. Raturi, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. This writ petition arises out of the Consolidation Proceeding held under the U.P. Consolidation of Land Holdings Act, 1953. The dispute is between the two brothers relating to partition of the agricultural land situated in two Villages namely; Bhalswagaj and Chhachhrauli. 3. A suit under Section 176 of the U.P. Z.A. and L.R. Act, 1950 was filed by the respondent no. 4, 5 and 6 bearing Suit No. 73 of 1998. The judgment dated 12.6.1978 is on record. From perusal of which, it reveals that partition suit was only in respect of the agricultural land of Village Bhalswagaj. The judgment does not mention the partition in respect of the agricultural land of Village Chhachhrauli. In the meantime, consolidation proceedings initiated and notice under Section 4- A of U.P. Consolidation of Land Holdings Act, 1953 was issued. When the CH Form-5 was issued the name of the petitioner was shown for half of the share and the name of the respondents was shown for half of the share. Objection under Section 9 of the U.P. Consolidation of Land Holdings Act, 1953 was filed by the respondents claiming whole agricultural land of village Chhachhrauli, which was contested by the petitioners. 4. All the three Consolidation Courts i.e. Consolidation Officer, Settlement Officer Consolidation and Deputy Director of Consolidation have held that whole land of Village Chachrauli was given to the respondents, but there is no evidence on record to show that in the partition suit filed under Section 176 of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act being Suit No. 73 of 1978, the land of Village Chachrauli was also included for partition. Therefore, all the three courts below have fell into error in declaring the title of the respondents over whole land situate at Village Chhachhrauli ignoring the provisions of Section 171 of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act, 1950 after the death of Karam Singh-the father of the petitioner and grand father of the respondents. Therefore, the judgments and orders of all three courts below are set aside. 5. The matter is remitted to the Consolidation Officer for deciding the same afresh. The Consolidation Officer is directed to decide the objection filed by the respondents under Section 9 of the U.P. Consolidation of Land Holdings Act, 1953 applying the provisions of Section 171 of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act after the death of Karam Singh. 6. Writ petition is allowed. No order as to costs. (P.C. Verma, J.) 13.8.2008 Rathour