JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Shree Prakash Srivastava, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Udayan Nandan, learned counsel for respondents.

2. Facts of the present case as curled out of the writ petition are as follows:

(i) The dispute is arising out of a proceedings under Section 9 of Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 1953’).

(ii) Dispute relates to two Khatas one bearing No.223, situated in Village- Pachrukhiya Tappa, wherein in the basic year, name of Hamid, Mahmood and Smt. Saitul were recorded. The other Khata bearing No. 215, is situated in Village- Sahrauna, wherein in the basic year, name of the original petitioner i.e Smt. Saghira, was recorded.

(iii) Original petitioner has filed an objection only in respect of Khata No.223 of village Pachrukhiya Tappa, that she is the widow of Zainuddin, and her name be entered in place of Smt. Saitul, recorded wrongly. In respect of other Khata No.215, Smt. Saitul, original respondent no.3, filed an objection alleging that she is mother of Zainuddin and Smt. Saghira has no concern being widow of another person and after death of her husband she remarried with a person namely, Ismail of vil