JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner in both these writ petitions, which arise out of proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 for eviction of the petitioners from separate areas of plot no. 152-Sa area 0.3790 hectares, which is recorded in the revenue records as pasture land.

2. In both these writ petitions, orders of the Tehsildar ordering eviction of the petitioners and that of the Collector dismissing the consequential appeals are under challenge. The orders in both the cases are dated 29.10.2018 and 16.09.2019, respectively, though in the petitions they are separate orders.

3. Assailing the impugned orders, the contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is identical in both the writ petitions.

4. The first contention is that the order passed by the Tehsildar was ex-parte.

5. The second contention raised is that proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 should not have been proceeded with as a title suit was pending before the Civil Court, especially because the proceedings under Section 67 of the Code, are summary proceedings and that the impugned orders would necessarily be subject to the orders passed by the Civil Cour