Suits under Section 229B of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act are of special character with no limitation for filing, and findings of fact by the trial Court were upheld.

JUDGMENT :

(Chandra Kumar Rai, J.)

1. Heard Mr. Rahul Sahai, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Mridul Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Mr. Rakesh Pandey, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Raj Kishore Pandey, learned counsel for the contesting respondent nos.4/2.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the dispute relates to plot no.988 area 0.29 acre (old plot no.1262 / 3, 1264/4) situated in Village-Tindwari, Pargana Tahsil & District-Banda. A civil suit no.115/ 1982 for mandatory injunction was filed on behalf of the Sheetal Prasad (father of respondent no.4/1 & 4/3) in respect to plot no.988 area 0.29 acre stating that the petitioners are recorded owner of the plot in dispute and defendants have carried out unauthorized construction in the north western corner of plot no.988, which is liable to be removed. Trial Court decreed the plaintiff suit vide judgment and decree dated 29.5.1985. Against the judgment and decree dated 29.5.1985 passed by trial Court, petitioners' father filed civil appeal No.63/1985 which was allowed vide judgment dated 5.11.1985 setting aside the judgment and decree of trial Court dated 29.5.1985 on the ground of jurisdiction. The decree passed by the lower appellate Court was maintained up to Hon'ble Apex Court in special leave to appeal. Hon'ble Apex Court while dismissing the leave to appeal vide judgment dated 23.8.1999 permitted the plaintiff to avail appropriate remedy before appropriate forum. After the adjudication of civil suit by Hon'ble Apex Court vide judgment dated 23.8.1999 on the ground of jurisdiction Sheetla Prasad-(father of respondent nos.4/1 to 4/3) instituted a suit under Section 229B read with Section 209 of Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as "U.P.Z.A. &. L.R. Act") in respect to plot no.988 area 0.29 acre, which was registered as Suit No.1 / 60 of 2005-2006. Trial Court framed the issues in the aforementioned suit and permitted the parties to lead the evidence in support of their cases. Trial Court vide judment and decree dated 10.2.2017 decreed the plaintiff suit. The judgment and decree of trial Court dated 10.2.2017 has been maintained in appeal under Section 331 (3) of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act by the Commissioner vide judgment dated 12.3.2019. The judgment of Commissioner dated 12.3.2019 has been maintained further in second appeal by the Board of Revenue vide judgment dated 24.2.2023, hence this writ petition on behalf of the petitioners for the following reliefs:

"i. to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned judgment / order dated 25.5.2023 passed by the Member Judicial Board of Revenue U.P. at Allahabad in Case No.REW/ 822/2023/ Banda (Computerized Case No.AL2023071100822) (Buddh Prakash Vs. Sheetal Prakash) (Annexure No.1 to the writ petition).

ii. to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the judgment / decree dated 12.3.2019 passed by the Commissioner Chitrakoot Dham Division, Banda in Appeal No.01034 / 2017 (Buddh Prakash and Others Vs. Ram Narayan and others) (Annexure No.3 to the writ petition).

iii. to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the judgment / order dated 10.2.2017 passed by the Deputy Collector (Revenue) / Assistant Collector Ist Class Banda in O.S. No.1/60 of 2005-06 (Sheetal Prakash vs. Buddh Prakash and Others) (Annexure No.4 to the writ petition)."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the suit under Section 229B/209 of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act filed by the plaintiff-respondent was decreed in the arbitrary manner. He further submitted that although issues were framed in the suit but the trial Court has not decided the suit in proper manner according to the issues framed in the suit. He further submitted that by cryptic order, the suit under Section 229B / 209 of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act has been decreed. He next submitted that earlier the civi