Hon’ble Ram Surat Ram (Maurya), J.—Heard Sri Rohit Singh, for the petitioners, Standing Counsel, for State of U.P., Rajesh Yadav, Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat and Santosh Srivastava, for contesting respondents.

2. The writ petition has been filed for quashing the orders of Additional Collector dated 29.8.2006, condoning the delay in filing application for cancellation of pattas under Section 198 (4) of U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and Board of Revenue U.P. dated 18.12.2007 dismissing the revision of the petitioners and 10.7.2013 dismissing the review application of the petitioners, filed against the aforesaid orders.

3. Kiran and others (respondents-5 to 12) (hereinafter referred to as the respondents) filed an application (registered as Case No. 52 of 2005-06) under Section 198 (4) of the Act, on 27.10.2005 for cancellation of pattas dated 30.5.1995, allotting the land in dispute by Land Management Committee to the petitioners, as approved by Sub-Divisional Officer, by order dated 19.7.1995. It has been stated by the respondents that Land Management Committee granted patta of the land in dispute to the respondents on 12.7.1993, which was duly approved by Sub-Divisional Officer. They were given possession over the land allotted to them and their names were also mutated in the revenue records. Although the land in dispute was already allotted to the respondents and they were in possession of it, but without any notice/agenda and holding any meeting for allotment of the land in dispute, it was again allotted to the petitioners by resolution dated 30.5.1995. Without disclosing the correct facts, approval of Sub-Divisional Officer was obtained secretly on 19.7.1995. Although there were various landless persons of schedule castes category, but the land in dispute was illegally allotted to the persons other than schedule castes. Plot 332 and 562 were pasture land and pots 339 and 524 were reserved for plantation and flaying sites and falling within the categories of land mentioned under Section 132 of the Act, but these plots were also allotted. Bablu, Rajendra, Ravindra and Mahesh Pal were sons of Sadhuram and Smt. Usha was wife of Sadhuram, Vinod, Anil and Sunil were sons of Bhopal, brother of Sadhuram, the then Pradhan, but land has been allotted to them without prior permission of the Collector. Alongwith the application another application for condonation of delay was filed stating therein that allotment was made without any notice and holding any meeting as such the respondents had no knowledge about the allotment. When the petitioners were getting Credit Card from the Lekhpal for agricultural loan on 29.7.2005, then for the first time they came to know about the allotments made in favour of the petitioners. In the meantime election intervened and after expiry of the election, the application was filed.

4. The petitioners filed their objection dated 11.8.2006 in delay condonation application and also filed their written statement. Delay condonation application was heard by Additional Collector, who by order dated 29.8.2006 held limitation for filing application for cancellation of patta would start from date of knowledge as held by Full Bench of Board of Revenue U.P. in Virendra Singh v. State of U.P., 1994 RD 540 and Kunwar Lal v. Land Management Committee, 2005 (98) RD 508. On these findings, delay in filing the application for cancellation of patta, has been condoned. The petitioners filed a revision (registered as Revision No. 92 of 2005-06) from the aforesaid order. The revision was heard by the Member, Board of Revenue, U.P., who by his order dated 18.12.2007 dismissed the revision. The petitioners filed a review application (registered as Review Application No. 08 of 2007-08) which was also dismissed by order dated 10.7.2013. Hence this writ petition has been filed.

5. The counsel for the petitioners submitted that five years limitation as provid