A. K. Ganguly, J.: In all the four writ petitions, the facts are identical, and as such, they have been heard analogously and are disposed of by this judgment treating the matters as on day's list. It may be noted that the facts in detail have been argued only in respect of the writ petition filed by Sk. Liakat Ali & Anr. and in this judgment those facts will be discussed.

2. The petitioner's case is that they are in occupation of Plot Nos. 4583 and 4588 on Mouza Galsi, J.L. No. 99, Khatian No. 1868 in the district of Burdwan and they have allegedly purchased the aforesaid plots from the successor-in-interest of one Sreenath Roy. In support of their alleged title the petitioners had relied on record of rights and also on certain deeds which have been annexed to the writ petition.

3. From a perusal of the record of rights it appears that the said record of rights prepared on the basis of cadestral survey shows that the superior interest in the land vests in Bharat Samrat and the name of one Sreenath Roy has been recorded as Raiyat Sthitiban. The said right of occupancy Raiyat was reflected only in the cadestral survey. The petitioners have not disclosed the latest record of ri