Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 179 (ALL)

Hari Lal v. Dy. Director of Consolidation

2015-01-28

RAM SURAT RAM (MAURYA)

body2015
JUDGMENT Ram Surat Ram (Maurya), J. 1. Notice on behalf of respondent-1 has been accepted by Chief Standing Counsel and on behalf of respondents-2 to 5 has been accepted by Sri Niraj Tiwari. Respondent-6 is uncontesting party while respondent-7 is the wife of petitioner-2 and is transferee of the land from Mansa who was the co-sharer in chak No. 124. In the light of the concession given by the Counsel for the petitioners no counter-affidavit is required to be filed by the respondents and with the consent of the parties the writ petition is decided finally. 2. Heard Sri Vinod Kumar Yadav for the petitioners and Sri Niraj Tiwari for contesting respondents-2 to 5. The writ petition has been filed against the order of Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 10.9.2014 passed in chak allotment proceeding under UP Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953. 3. The dispute between the parties is for allotment of chak on plot No. 460. In the southern side of plot No. 416 a sector road has been carved out which according to the parties has now been developed as a commercial road while western side as well as in the northern side chak roads were also existing. Respondent-6 is allotted chak in the western side of plot No. 416 and there is no dispute of his chak between the parties. Now the dispute between the parties is that the petitioners who were chak holder No. 124 and Feku and others, respondents-2 to 5 who was chak holder No. 303. It is admitted between the parties that both of them are the co-sharers in plot No. 416 as such both of them are entitled for chak on it. 4. Against the chak as allotted from the stage of Consolidation Officer respondents-2 to 5 filed an appeal and in the appeal they have stated that the chak as allotted to them by the Consolidation Officer is in the northern side of the chak of the petitioners due to which they have been deprived from the access of sector road in the southern side. It is stated that although the Settlement Officer Consolidation has allowed the appeal of respondents-2 to 5 by order dated 17.12.2004 and directed for carving out the chak to them in the eastern side giving frontage of sector road in southern side. It is stated that although the Settlement Officer Consolidation has allowed the appeal of respondents-2 to 5 by order dated 17.12.2004 and directed for carving out the chak to them in the eastern side giving frontage of sector road in southern side. But the allegation of respondents- 2 to 5 was that the order was subsequently changed and the position of the Consolidation Officer has been maintained which necessitated to them to file a revision before the Deputy Director of Consolidation and Deputy Director of Consolidation by the impugned order dated 10.9.2014 has carved out the chak to respondents-2 to 5 in the western side of the chak of the petitioners. It appears that on the basis of the order of Deputy Director of Consolidation chak holder No. 303 will be in the western side while chak holder No. 124 in the eastern side. 5. The Counsel for the petitioners submits that the grievance of respondents-2 to 5 has already been satisfied by the Settlement Officer Consolidation and they have allotted chak in the eastern side. The allegation that in exercise of powers under section 42-A the order was varied and position of Consolidation Officer has been restored, is not substantiate inasmuch as there is no subsequent order correcting the order of Settlement Officer Consolidation dated 17.12.2004, in such circumstances, the revision was misconceived and was liable to be dismissed. In any case there was no necessity for the revisional Court to shift the petitioners from the western side of the chak as in the meantime after the order of Settlement Officer Consolidation various portions have been sold for residential purpose in such circumstances the position of the Settlement Officer Consolidation giving chak to respondents-2 to 5 in the eastern side be maintained. 6. The respondents have no grievance in case they be allotted chak giving frontage of the sector road in the southern side of plot No. 416 as the findings have been recorded by the Settlement Officer Consolidation in the order dated 17.12.2004. In view of the agreement between the parties the writ petition succeeds and is allowed. The order of Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 10.9.2014 is set aside and the order of Settlement Officer Consolidation dated 17.12.2004 is reinstated. In view of the agreement between the parties the writ petition succeeds and is allowed. The order of Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 10.9.2014 is set aside and the order of Settlement Officer Consolidation dated 17.12.2004 is reinstated. The consolidation authorities shall ensure that the chak of respondents 2 to 5 be allotted in the eastern side giving frontage of the sector road in the southern side on the spot.