Satish Chandra, C. J.

1. BEING unable to agree with the views expressed by a learned Single Judge in Smt. Jagrani v. Deputy Director of Consolidation, U. P., 1972 RD 96= 1972 AWR (J) 3 the learned Judge who heard this writ petition has referred the following question of law for decision by a larger Bench :- "Whether a Sirdar could co-opt a third person as Sirdar with her and, if so, what rights the co-opted person will have during the life time of the Sirdar and thereafter ?"

2. THE co-option is alleged to have been effected in 1953 or 1954, that is to say, after the coming into force of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1951. THE law in this respect stood settled by Kalawati v. Consolidation Officer, 1968 AWR 139. In that case one of us (Satish Chandra, J.) held :-

"THE position under the Tenancy Act was well settled. A person could become a co-tenant by estoppel or acquiescence. THE reason was that transfer of a tenancy holding was prohibited. Letting was permitted with the consent of the landlord under Sec. 33 of the U. P. Tenancy Act, 1939. Interpreting those provisions, decided cases held that it was not exhaustive and a person could become a co-tenant