Research › Browse › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

1988 DIGILAW 1142 (ALL)

Mst. Bilqis v. DDC & Others

1988-12-12

B.L.LOOMBA

body1988
JUDGMENT B.L. Loomba, J. - I have heard learned counsel for the parties. Revision under section 48 of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act is pending before the Deputy Director of Consolidation. An application under section 5 of the Limitation Act is also pending. 2. By the impugned order dated 21.3.88, Annexure6, it was directed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation that as was the agreed position, there appears to have been some sort of fraud committed in this matter and in order to get at the correct factual position the Consolidation Officer concerned was directed to be summoned for 21.5.88, The writ petition has been filed against this order. 3. The only point submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the application under section 5 of the Limitation Act should be decided first before the learned Deputy Director of Consolidation proceeds to decide the revision under section 48 of the Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the presence of the Consolidation Officer is not at all necessary for purpose of disposal of the application under section 5 of the Limitation Act, while according to the learned counsel for the oppositeparties the presence of the Consolidation Officer was really required even for the disposal of the application under section 5 of the Limitation Act. 4. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner in so far as the plea, that the application under section 5 of the Limitation Act has to be decided first is obviously correct. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction that the learned Deputy Director of Consolidation shall take up and consider the matter again and in case the presence of the Consolidation Officer is not considered necessary for purpose of disposal of the application under section 5 of the Limitation Act the Deputy Director of Consolidation shall not summon the Consolidation Officer and shall first take up and decide the application under section 5 of the Limitation Act. If the application under section 5 of the Limitation Act is allowed it will then be open to summon the Consolidation Officer for purpose of disposal of the Revision under section 48 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act. (Order accordingly)