A proceeding under Section 120-B of the U. P. Zamindari Aboli tion and Land Reforms Act, being proceeding No. 711 was decided against the petitioner on 28-4-1986 by the Tehsildar/assistant Collector, Meia, District Al lahabad, Revision No. 71 of 1986-87 preferred by the petitioner was decided against him by an order dated 20th January, 1987 by the Chief Revenue Officer/additional Collector,

Allahabad. Against these two orders the petitioner being aggrieved, has moved the present writ petition.

2. Sri S. K. Shukla, alongwiih Sri R. K. Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the decision with regard to the finding of fact to the property has not been correctly. decided. He claims that the property belongs to the petitioner even before the Consolidation of Holdings had taken place and the Gaon Sabha has no right or title in the said property. His basic claim is of title. He further submits that no- notice was given to him. These technical points mil not help him such because even if the notice was given, the question will remain for determination of title and the question is to be decided in respect of the suit property,

3. The question of title can onl