The burden of proof in establishing cultivatory possession and the validity of entries in revenue records is crucial in property disputes.

JUDGMENT :

1. The aforesaid writ petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:-

“(i) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, for calling the records and quashing the order dated 16.09.2013 passed by Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar, District Mirzapur (Respondent No.3) in Case No.67 of 2012-2013 (Ram Chander versus Ramji Sharma and others (Annexure No.4));

(ii) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, for calling the records and quashing the order dated 19.10.2022 passed by the Board of Revenue, U.P. at Lucknow (respondent no.2) in Revision No.REV/5/2013-2014/Mirzapur (Computer Case No.R201316310051766 (Ramji and others versus Ram Chander and others (Annexure No.6))”

2. The properties in dispute are Plot Nos.1017/2 and 1018 in Village-Mulhawan (Gosaipur), Tehsil-Sadar, District Mirzapur. The case of the petitioners is that their predecessor-in-interest, namely Ganesh Prasad, was recorded to have been in possession of the plots in dispute in the khatauni of 1359 fasli. Consequent to the enactment of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950[Act, 1950], all estates were vested in the State with effect from 01.07.1952 which corresponds to the fasli year 1359. It is stated that in the basic year khatauni 1359, the name of the aforesaid Ganesh Prasad was recorded in possession of the plots in dispute whose class of tenure was mentioned as ‘zaman-8’ which denotes land held by ‘adhivasis’. Consequent to a notification dated 13.10.1954 under Section 240-A of the Act, 1950, the aforesaid Ganesh Prasad, who was recorded as ‘adhivasi’, became 'sirdar' of the land in dispute. The consequence of Chapter-II of the Act, 1950, which contains the consequences of vesting, etc., did not apply to 'sirdari' rights, which had accrued in favour of the aforesaid Ganesh Prasad under Section 240-B of the Act, 1950. In khatauni of 1362 fasli, the aforesaid Ganesh Prasad was recorded as 'sirdar' (Class-II) with regard to the plots in dispute. By virtue of Section 139 of the Act, 1950, all persons who had acquired sirdari rights by operation of law became bhumidhar and, accordingly, the aforesaid Ganesh Prasad acquired bhumidhari rights on the disputed property. During consolidation operations held under the Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953[Consolidation Act], in the Statement of Principles, the disputed land was not earmarked for public purpose (land vested in Gaon Sabha or Local Authorities under Sections 117 and 117-A of the Act, 1950). After requisite formalities, CH Form-2A was prepared by the Consolidator in which the aforesaid Ganesh Prasad was recorded as 'sirdar'. After the final consolidation scheme came into force, CH Form-45 was prepared and the aforesaid Ganesh Prasad was recorded as bhumidhar with transferable rights with regard to the plots in dispute.

3. On a complaint filed by the respondent no.5, proceedings under Section 33/39 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901[Land Revenue Act] were initiated and the Tehsildar submitted a report on the direction of the Sub-Divisional Officer concerned. An objection was filed by the petitioners before the Sub-Divisional Officer and the petitioners also contested the case before the Sub-Divisional Officer. By the impugned order dated 16.09.2013, the Sub-Divisional Officer directed the names of the petitioners to be struck off from the revenue records and the words ‘talab’ and ‘bheeta’ be incorporated in the revenue records over the plots in dispute. The revision filed by the petitioners against the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer dated 16.09.2013 was dismissed by the impugned order dated 19.10.2022 passed by the Board of Revenue.

4. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State-respondents, it has been stated that old Plot No.1017/2 has been renumbered as Plot No.654 and the old Plot No.1018 has been renumbered as Plot No.653. It is categorically stated that the aforesaid Ganesh Prasad, was never in cultivatory possession of the plots in dispute. Th