K.N. Misra, J.

1. THIS petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been directed against the orders passed by the opposite parties nos. 3 and 4 in the proceedings under Sec. 42-A of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act (hereinafter referred to as the said Act). Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the petitioner no. 1 Ram Murat was allotted chak no. 254 and petitioner no. 2 Kalloo was allotted chak no. 37 as against their original holding. The opposite party no. 1 Mata Saran was allotted chak no. 207 and his father Ram Jiawan, opposite party no. 2, was allotted chak no. 265 as against their original holding. The allotment of chak was confirmed by the Settlement Officer (Consolidation) under Sec. 23 (1) of the said Act and possession over the respective chaks was delivered to all the tenure-holders including the petitioners and opposite parties nos. 1 and 2 some 10 years ago and thus they were in cultivatory possession over their respective land. Petitioner No. 1 Ram Murat had constructed a well on his chak no. 254 for irrigating his land. The opposite party No. 1 Mata Saran moved an application before the Settlement Officer (Consolidation) praying that the