JUDGMENT :

[Dinesh Pathak, J.]

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the state authorities and learned counsel for the Gaon Sabha.

2. In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and the order proposed to be passed, this Court proceeds to decide the case finally at admission stage with the consent of the counsel for the parties present, without calling for the respective affidavits of the parties in the present writ petition (i.e. counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit).

3. Both the writ petitions, as above, have been filed against the order passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation and the Consolidation Officer with respect to the same plot in question which is the subject matter of original proceeding under Section 9-A(2) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act.

4. To avoid repetition of facts and the provisions of law, this Court deems it appropriate to decide both the writ petitions simultaneously by the common order of the date. Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 3673 of 2022 shall be the leading file.

5. Facts culled out from the averment made in the writ petition are that property in question basically belongs to Lal Singh, son o