JUDGMENT

Agarwala, J. - This is an application Under Article 226 of the Constitution praying that the order of the Board of Revenue dated 27-9-1955 be quashed. The facts briefly stated are as follows:

The opposite party No. 2 Ram Autar was in possession of the plots in dispute as a trespasser. A suit for his ejectment was filed by the Petitioners u/s 180 of the U.P. Tenancy Act sometime in 1943. The suit was decreed and Ram Autar was ejected. Delivery of possession was taken by the Petitioners on 11th December 1943. Then came Act No. X of 1947 u/s 27 of which not only tenants, who had been ejected u/s 171 of the U.P. Tenancy Act, but also trespassers, who had been ejected u/s 180 of the U.P. Tenancy Act, were to be reinstated. Under Sub-section (5) of Section 27 of the Act it was provided that there persons were to regain the same rights and liabilities as they had on the date on which they were ejected or dispossessed. In this way, the opposite party Ram Autar was reinstated to the holding on the 6th June, 1950. A week later the present Petitioners filed a second suit for Ram Autar's ejectment u/s 180 of the Act on the plea that under Sub-section (5) of Section 27 of Act X of 1947.