JUDGMENT :

The petitioners, who are eight in number, impugn the validity of the orders dated 05.06.1986, 05.09.1985 and 02.11.1979 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Varanasi, Camp Gyanpur, the Assistant Settlement Officer of Consolidation, Varanasi (West) and the Consolidation Officer, Gyanpur, District Varanasi (now Bhadohi), respectively, rejecting the petitioners' claim for mutation of their rights over land, which shall be hereinafter morefully described.

2. The facts giving rise to this petition are required to be noticed about their salient features, which are these:

One Balraji, widow of Chandra Shekhar, was the recorded tenure holder of the following plot numbers, which are shown below in tabular form indicating the old numbers and the new:

3. Apart from the land, above mentioned, that was agricultural and, therefore, consolidated into a chak in Smt. Balraji's name, bearing Chak No.68, Smt. Balraji also owned certain plot numbers that did not qualify as land under the Act of 1953 and were, therefore, excluded from the consolidation scheme. Plots of land, that were not included as part of Chak No.68, belonging to Balraji, are shown below, also in tabular form :

4. The dispute is with regard to land recorded in the basic year in the name of Smt. Balraji, comprising Chak No.68. It is the petitioners' case that the land in dispute was sold in favour of petitioner Nos.1 to 7 by petitioner No.8, Smt. Balraji vide registered sale deed dated 29.05.1974. Later on, a deed of rectification dated 12.07.1974 was executed by Smt. Balraji, inasmuch as in the sale deed dated 29.05.1974, one of the plots transferred in favour of petitioner Nos.1 to 7 was mentioned as Plot No.161/347, admeasuring 2 biswa 17 dhoor by an inadvertent clerical error, whereas the correct number of the plot sold was 1161/347 for the same area.

5. It is the petitioners' further case that by time the sale deed dated 29.05.1974 came to be executed, the chak carved out had been confirmed and the tenure holders delivered possession over their respective chak. Through the sale deed dated 29.05.1974, therefore, the entire area of Chak No.68 was transferred by Balraji to petitioner Nos.1 to 7. In addition, the sale deed also transferred certain other plots of land, that were outside the consolidation scheme. The old plot numbers no longer remained in existence and Chak No.68 had become identifiable in terms of the four new numbers as renumbered during the consolidation operations. Therefore, it is the petitioners' case that a typographical error in the mention of one of the plots, comprising the chak with reference to its old number would not affect the identity of the property transferred through the sale deed dated 29.05.1974 (for short, 'the sale deed').

6. It is also the petitioners' case that though in the basic year Smt. Balraji was recorded over a large tract of land, one Smt. Devraji, a half sister of Balraji's deceased husband, Chandra Shekhar and another Ram Jag, an uncle of the late Chandra Shekhar, filed objections during the consolidation operations much before the sale deed was executed, claiming a share in Chandra Shekhar's land, that had come to be recorded in Balraji's name. The said objections were compromised and Smt. Devraji given a share in the holding inherited by Smt. Balraji from Chandra S