The order under Section 12 of U.P.C.H. Act does not operate as res judicata in the subsequent proceedings under Section 9A(2), and the cause of action and party actions are crucial in determining the admissibility of objections.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. H.P. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Madhusudan Dixit, learned counsel for contesting respondent Nos.5 and 6.

2. Brief facts of the case are that in the Basic year of the Consolidation operation, Chandra Shekhar and Laxmi Shanker sons of Ram Dularey were recorded over plot of Khata Nos.5 and 13 situated in village-Shivpur, Pargana-Hathgaon, District-Fatehpur while Ram Kishore son of Ram Dularey and Vidya Sagar sons of Brij Kishore were recorded over Khata No.13. On 18.02.1975 Ram Kishore and Vidya Sagar transferred their interest in the land of Khata No.13 to petitioners by means of a registered sale deed. Chandra Shekhar and Laxmi Shanker also transferred their interest in favour of the petitioners by means of the registered sale deed dated 03.02.1975. An objection under Section 12 of U.P.C.H. Act was filed by petitioners to record their names on the basis of sale deed, the Assistant Consolidation Officer by his order dated 22.04.1975 ordered to record the names of petitioners on the basis of sale deed. Respondent No.4 Vidya Sagar filed an objection under Section 9A(2) of U.P.C.H, Act claiming right in the disputed plot but Consolidation Officer by his order dated 25.01.1979 held that order dated 22.04.1975 passed by Assistant Consolidation Officer is binding on the parties and he could not sit in appeal over the order of Assistant Consolidation Officer passed under Section 12 of U.P.C.H. Act accordingly, objection filed by respondent No.4 under Section 9A(2) of U.P.C.H,. Act was rejected. An appeal under Section 11 of U.P.C.H. Act was filed by respondent Nos.5 and 6 before Settlement Officer of Consolidation, the appeal was allowed vide order dated 05.12.1979 and matter was remanded before Consolidation Officer for fresh decision of objection on merit. Although, no appeal was filed by respondent No.4 against the order of Consolidation Officer dated 25.01.1979. Against the appellate order dated 05.12.1979 revision under Section 48 of U.P.C.H,. Act was filed by petitioners, Deputy Director of Consolidation by order dated 18.03.1982 dismissed the revision filed by petitioners as well as exercising the power under Section 48 of U.P.C.H. Act order dated 22.04.1975 passed under Section 12 of U.P.C.H.Act was set aside being without jurisdiction. Hence this writ petition.

3. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that one order under Section 12 of U.P.C.H,. Act has been passed in favour of petitioners and the order has attained finality then objection under Section 9A(2) of U.P.C.H. Act filed by respondent No.4 cannot be entertained as order passed under Section 12 of U.P.C.H. Act between the parties will operate as res judicata in the proceedings under Section 9A (2) of U.P.C.H. Act. He further submitted that order dated 22.04.1975 passed in the proceedings under Section 12 of U.P.C.H. was not challenged in Appeal or revision as such the same cannot be set aside in the present proceedings under Section 9A (2) of U.P.C.H,. Act exercising suo motu power under Section 48 of U.P.C.H. Act accordingly counsel for the petitioners submitted that impugned revisional order dated 18.03.1982 passed by revisional Court and order dated 5.12.1979 passed by appellate Court be set aside.

4. On the other hand, counsel for the respondent Nos.5 and 6 has submitted that order passed in the proceeding under Section 12 will not operate as res judicata in the title proceedings under Section 9 A(2) of U.P.C.H,. Act. He placed provisions of Sections 9A, 11-A and 12 of U.P.C.H. Act which are as follows:..............

"[9A. Disposal of Cases relating to claims to land and partition of joint holdings. -

(1) The Assistant Consolidation Officer shall -

(i) where objections in respect of claims to land or partition of joint holdings are filed, after hearing the parties concerned, and

(ii) where no objections are filed after making such enquiry as he may deem necessary, settle the disputes, correct the mistakes and effect partiti