JUDGMENT :

1. Heard, Shri Prashant Jaiswal, learned counsel for the petitioners in Writ Petition No.543 (Cons) of 2006 and opposite parties no.5 to 8 in Writ Petition No.862 (Cons) of 2006 (here-in-after referred as the petitioners), Shri Ramesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 in Writ Petition No.543 (Cons) of 2006 and petitioner in Writ Petition No.862 (Cons) of 2006 (here-in-after referred as the opposite party no.2) and Shri Dilip Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the Gaon Sabha in both the writ petitions. The office of the learned Chief Standing Counsel has accepted notice for opposite party no.1 in Writ Petition No.543 (Cons) of 2006 and for opposite parties no.1 to 3 in Writ Petition No.862 (Cons) of 2006.

2. The Writ Petition No.543 (Cons) of 2006 has been filed challenging the judgment and order dated 20.05.2006 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation and Writ Petition No. 862 (Cons) of 2006 challenging the same judgment and order dated 20.05.2006 to the extent of rejecting the title of the petitioners on trees and boring well as well as directing the Plot No.798 to be recorded in the name of Gaon Sabha. The dispute in Writ Petition No.543