Daekhi v. Deputy Director of Consolidation, Jaunpur
1988-01-13
M.P.SINGH
body1988
DigiLaw.ai
JUDGMENT M.P. Singh, J. - Heard Sri O.P. Singh for the petitioner and Sri Aditya Narain for the respondent No. 3. 2. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition against an order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation, jaunpur dated 25-9-1986. The original plots of the petitioner were as follows :- Plot No. Area 496/1 0.15 decimal 496/3 1.07 decimal 512/2 0.65 decimal 1.87 decimal 3. The Consolidation Officer by an order dated 25-12-1985 allotted the following plots to the petitioner. Plots No. Area 350/1 0.14 decimal 350/2 0.21 decimal 518/M 0.02 decimal 495/M 0.03 decimal 496/3 0.15 decimal 0.55 decimal 4. The total area of the said five plots, alleged to have been allotted to the petitioner, was O.55 decimal. The petitioner was satisfied with this allotment. She did not prefer any appeal against the order of the Consolidation Officer. It is alleged that somebody else filed an appeal before the Settlement Officer Consolidation on behalf of the petitioner and the same was dismissed against which a revision was also filed by somebody before the Deputy Director of Consolidation. The petitioner asserts that she never filed the revision, even. This point was argued oh her behalf before the revisional court. 5. A counter affidavit has been filed by Laxmi Narain respondent No. 3 in the present writ petition. He has admitted the claim of the petitioner inasmuch as he has no objection that the petitioner be allotted the plots which were initially allotted to her by the Consolidation Officer on 25-12-1985. 6. After looking into the record of the case I am satisfied that the petitioner neither filed any appeal before the Settlement Officer Consolidation nor any revision before the Deputy Director of Consolidation and as such there was no justification to make any alteration in the plots allotted to the petitioner by the order of the Consolidation Officer dated 25-12-1985. 7. In the result, the writ petition succeeds and the orders of the Settlement Officer Consolidation and the Deputy Director of Consolidation are quashed and the order of the Consolidation Officer is restored.