Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 2441 (ALL)

Jangi Alias Jang Lal v. D. D. C.

2016-07-14

RAM SURAT RAM (MAURYA)

body2016
JUDGMENT Ram Surat Ram (Maurya),J. Heard Sri Sachida Nand Tripathi for the petitioners. 2. This petition has been filed against the order of SOC dated 30.6.2016, by which he has vacated the interim order granted in the appeal. 3. There is a dispute between the parties for allotment of chak on plot no. 152. The petitioners as well as contesting respondent, both were co-sharers in plot no. 152. From the stage of ACO, the petitioners as well as contesting respondents, both were allotted chak on plot no. 152. The contesting respondents filed an objection u/s 20 of the Act, in which the chak of the petitioners as well as contesting respondents were exchanged on plot no. 152 itself. The grievance of the petitioners in the appeal was that due to order of CO, their boring, bamboo clumps and 67 shagon trees, were given in the chak of the contesting respondents, therefore, the order of CO is liable to be set aside. The appeal of the petitioner was dismissed. The petitioner challenged the aforesaid order in revision, which was allowed and the matter was remanded to the appellate court for deciding the appeal afresh by order dated 13.6.2011. Thereafter, the appeal is pending. In the meantime, the contesting respondents have been deprived from their chak and their chak is lying parti on the spot for about five years. He has moved an application before the Revenue Courts (as in the meantime, the village has been notified u/s 52 of the Act) for demarcation of his chak and delivery of possession on which, a team has been constituted for demarcation of the chak and delivery of possession. Therefore, the interim order passed in the appeal be vacated. On this application, SOC vacated the interim order by the impugned order dated 30.6.2016. Hence, this petition has been filed. 4. A perusal of the papers attached along with the writ petition shows that the petitioners as well as contesting respondents, both were co-sharers in plot no. 152 and both of them were allotted chak on plot no. 152. The grievance of the petitioners in the appeal is that their boring, bamboo clumps and 67 shagon trees have been given in the chak of contesting respondents by the order of CO. This was a short controversy and the SOC could have decided this controversy by making spot inspection within a reasonable time. 152. The grievance of the petitioners in the appeal is that their boring, bamboo clumps and 67 shagon trees have been given in the chak of contesting respondents by the order of CO. This was a short controversy and the SOC could have decided this controversy by making spot inspection within a reasonable time. It has been stated by the petitioner that although the SOC has inspected the spot on 29.10.2014, but the appeal has not been decided. 5. In the facts of the case, SOC is directed to decide the appeal expeditiously, preferably within a period of two months from the date of producing a certified copy of this order before him. In the meantime, it is agreed by the petitioners that they will have no objection in case delivery of possession be done according to the chak as proposed from the stage of ACO. Thus, the revenue authorities may demarcate the chak of the respondents as proposed by ACO. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observations.