JUDGMENT :

(Dinesh Pathak, J.)

1. Heard Sri Pramod Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel representing the respondent nos.1 to 4 and perused the record.

2. Present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners for the following reliefs:-

(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent nos.3 and 4 to make an entry and correct the revenue record in respect of order dated 03.06.1977 in case no. 5495 passed by the Consolidation Authorities under the provisions of the Sec.6 (2) of the U.P. Consolidation Act 1953, and issue the copy of fresh Khatauni of the Gata No. 2638 area 5ii/1 (5 Bigha 11 Bishwa) as mutation order dated 03.06.1977 in case no. 5495 passed by the Assistant Consolidation Officer, Majhiwa Sani Oran, Banda.

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent nos. 3 & 4 to consider and decide the representation dated 09.11.2021 submitted by petitioner before the District Magistrate, Banda, otherwise the petitioner would suffer irreparable loss and injury.

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the village Oran was notified under section 4 (2) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (in brevity 'U.P.C.H. Act') by notification promulgated on 05.05.1972. Subsequently, aforesaid notification was cancelled by notification dated June 7, 2016 issued under section 6 (1) of the U.P.C.H. Act. In paragraphs 5 and 6 of the petition it is stated that the Consolidation Officer has passed the order dated 03.06.1977 in Case No. 5495 under section 9-A (2) of the U.P.C.H. Act which had never been challenged and became final between the parties. It is submitted that the aforesaid order was passed during consolidation operation before its cancellation, wherein village/unit cease to be under consolidation operation by virtue of notification dated June 7, 2016 under section 6 (1) of the U.P.C.H. Act. Despite repeated requests made by the petitioner, till date authorities concerned are not complying with the order dated 03.06.1977 which became final between parties. To the best knowledge of the petitioner till date aforesaid order has not been challenged before any competent Court. It is further submitted that the Consolidation Authorities are under legal obligation to implement the order dated 03.06.1977 under the provisions as enunciated under section 6 (2) of the U.P.C.H. Act. Learned counsel for the petitioners, in support of his submission, has placed reliance on the judgment passed by this Court in Writ B No.695 of 2021 ( Shankar Lal vs. State of U.P. and others ).

4. In the case of Shankar Lal vs. State of U.P. and others (Writ B No.695 of 2021), after considering several judgments and government notification dated 12.12.2014, this Court has already held that the effect of cancellation of the notification under section 4 of the U.P.C.H. Act is that, subject to the final orders passed regarding correction of the record, the area ceases to be under consolidation operations. Relevant paragraphs i.e. para no.6, 7, 8 and 14 of the aforesaid judgment are being reproduced below :-

"6. Section 6(1) of U.P.C.H. Act empowers the State Government to cancel the notification issued under Section 4 of U.P.C.H. Act by which particular area or unit brought under the consolidation operation. The consequential effect of the cancellation of notification is enunciated under sub-Section 2 of Section 6 of U.P.C.H. Act which denotes that, from the date of cancellation of the notification area/unit shall ceased to be under consolidation operation subject to final orders passed with regard to correction o