The finality of the order passed by the learned single Judge and the jurisdiction of the Deputy Director of Consolidation were the central legal points established in the judgment.

( 1 ) THE instant writ petition is filed by the petitioners seeking a relief in the nature of certiorari quashing the orders dated 25. 4. 1987. 28. 4. 1988 and 26. 1 1. 2001 passed by the respondent Nos. 3, 2 and 1 respectively, copies whereof are filed and marked as Annexures-4. 5 and 12 to the writ petition.

( 2 ) ALTHOUGH the present writ petition is posted today for admission but with the consent of learned counsel for the parties. I propose to decide it finally on merits at admission stage.

( 3 ) IT is disturbing to note that litigation between the petitioners and contesting respondents relating to land in dispute is pending consideration from 1969. Even after expiry of about 33 years, dispute relating to land in dispute between the parties could not be finally decided. In these circumstances Voltaire had aptly said, "he was ruined twice in his life, once when he lost a law suit and once when he won a law suit".

( 4 ) IT is further noticed that present dispute between the parties came up before this Court in Writ petition No. 10563 of 1992 decided on 4. 8. 1995 wherein it was ordered by the learned single judge that the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Moradabad respondent No. 1, instead of remanding the case to the Consolidation Officer, Moradabad ought to have admitted additional evidence himself, on proper foundation for the same being made out before him. I have reason to believe that the aforesaid order dated 4,8. 1995, (a copy whereof is filed and marked as annexure-11 to the writ petition) was passed by the learned single Judge of this Court to cut short the litigation between the parties.

( 5 ) A close scrutiny of the aforesaid order dated 4. 8. 1995 revealed that the learned single Judge by his order impugned dated 4. 8. 1995, allowed the writ petition and order passed by the Deputy director of Consolidation, Moradabad was quashed with a direction to decide the revision himself after affording opportunity of hearing to both the parties. The opportunity to lead evidence was made subject to proper foundation being made out for such opportunity before him.

( 6 ) IT is also revealed from the perusal of the material available on record that after hearing both the parties, the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Moradabad, has passed an order on 21. 8. 1996 in this regard, which reads thus :

"heard the parties. Time for rebuttal allowed. Fixed 4. 6. 1996 for rebuttal arguments. Sd. illegible 21. 8. 1996. "

( 7 ) SEVERAL dates were given to the contesting respondent Nos. 4 to 15 to adduce evidence in rebuttal but ultimately they declined to adduce any evidence in rebuttal on 22. 1. 1998. The order passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Moradabad on 22. 1. 1998 is also reproduced herein below for ready reference :

"patrawali Prastuit Hui. Pukar Karai Gai. Ubhai Paksh Upasthit Hain. Aaj Patrawali Uttardata ke Sakshya Hetu Niyat Thi. Unki Ore Se Koi Sakshya Na Deye Jane Ka Kathan Prastuit Kiya atah Patrawali Waste Bahas Dinank 11. 9. 1998 Niyat Kee Jati Hai. 3d. Up Sanchalak Chakbandi. Moradabad 22. 1. 1998. "

( 8 ) IT is averred in para No. 11 of the writ petition that after remand from High Court, the statement of petitioner No. 1 All Dad Khan was recorded on oath before the Deputy Director of consolidation in which petitioner No. 1 has specifically stated that the land in dispute did not belong to the respondents but the petitioners had got it in partition Suit No. 15 under Section 176 of U. P. Z. A. and L. R. Act, a copy of final decree passed in Partition Suit No. 15 was filed before the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Moradabad. A copy of final decree is also filed with the writ petition and marked as Annexure-7 to the writ petition.

( 9 ) LEARNED counsel representing respondent Nos. 4 to 15 has filed counter-affidavit stating therein, inter alia, that the petitioners were not legally entitled to adduce evidence before the deputy Director of Consolidation, Moradabad, as a matter of course but we