IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL WRIT PETITION NO. 4293 OF 2001 (M/S) (Old No. 2638 of 1997) Bijendra Biswas & another. ………………….Petitioners. Versus The Board of Revenue, U.P. at Allahabad and others. ………Respondents Mr. J.C. Belwal, learned counsel for the petitioners. Mr. H.M. Raturi learned Standing Counsel for the respondent no. 2 and 3. Mr. Vijay Bhatt, learned counsel for the respondent no. 6. 5th August, 2008 Hon’ble P.C. Verma, J. By means of present writ petition, petitioner has prayed for a writ of certiorari quashing the judgment datd 30.12.1991 passed by the respondent no. 3, judgment dated 27.6.1995 passed by the respondent no. 2 and the judgment dated 15.10.1996 passed by the respondent no. 1 contained in Annexure No. 5, 6 an d 8 to the writ petition respectively. 2. Brief facts of the case are that a suit was filed by the husband of the respondent no. 6 under Section 229-B/176 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1960 for declaration and partition. In the said suit, defendant no. 1 / petitioner filed a written statement on 20.4.1981 denying the right and title of the plaintiffs on the ground that the husband of the respondent no. 6 Dhirendra Biswas was not the real brother and that the rehabilitation department had allotted 8 acres of land to 2 him on the ground of being refugee and his name ios alone recorded in the revenue records. State as well as Gram Sabha filed their respective written statements denying averments made in the plaint. In support of their case, parties filed their respective evidence as well as documents. 3. On the pleadings of the parties, the trial Court decreed the suit of the plaintiff vide order dated 12.4.1982. Against the said order, the father of the petitioners namely Suren Kumar filed an appeal. The Commissioner taking into account the additional evidence, allowed the appeal and dismissed the order passed by the court below and remanded the matter back to the trial Court for deciding the same afresh. After remand of the case, trial Court framed two additional issues and vide order dated 28.1.1992 decreed the suit. Against the said order, the father of the petitioners preferred an appeal. The said appeal was dismissed and the order passed by the court below was confirmed. Thereafter, Sri Suren Biswan (father of the petitioners) filed a Second Appeal before the Board of Revenue, U.P. Allahabad. The learned Board of Revenue, U.P. at Allahabad vide order dated 15.10.1996 dismissing the second appeal confirmed the orders passed by the Court below. 4. I have gone through the orders passed by all the three courts below. All the three courts below have recorded finding of fact, therefore, I am not inclined to interfere with the same under Article 226 of the 3 Constitution of India. The judgments and orders passed by all the three courts below are affirmed. 5. Writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. (P.C. Verma, J.) 5th August, 2008 Rathour