Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 2627 (ALL)

Samshad Ali Khan v. D. D. C.

2016-07-29

RAM SURAT RAM (MAURYA)

body2016
JUDGMENT Ram Surat Ram (Maurya),J. 1. Heard Sri Vinod Shankar Tripathi, for the petitioners and Sri Ram Das Yadav, for the caveators. 2. The writ petition has been filed against the orders of Consolidation Officer, dated 19.06.2014, Settlement Officer Consolidation, dated 13.08.2014 and Deputy Director of Consolidation, dated 28.03.2016 and 19.05.2016, passed in restoration application in the proceeding under Section 9-A of U.P. Consolidation Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). 3. The dispute between the parties is in respect of their share in plot 1054 recorded in basic consolidation year khata 102 of village Nariyawal, pargana and district Bareilly. It is alleged that dispute was decided by Assistant Consolidation Officer by his order dated 27.05.1990. Shamshad Ali and others filed an appeal from aforesaid order, which was allowed by Settlement Officer Consolidation by order dated 17.08.1999 and he set aside the order of Assistant Consolidation Officer and remanded the matter to Consolidation Officer for trial on merit. Two revisions were filed against aforesaid order, which were allowed by Deputy Director of Consolidation, by order dated 04.10.2011 and basic year entry of the names of Nisar Ali Khan and Mohabbe Ali Khan was maintained. Shamshad Ali and others filed Writ B No. 61135 of 2011, against this order, in which initially interim order dated 20.10.2011 was granted. Later on, writ petition was dismissed for want of prosecution under Chapter XII Rule 4 of High Court Rules on 14.12.2011. By order dated 02.04.2012, writ petition was restored to its original number. But thereafter, writ petition was dismissed as not pressed by order dated 26.07.2013. 4. The respondents filed an application before Consolidation Officer for giving effect to the order dated 04.10.2011, on which a report dated 24.12.2011 was submitted. On which Consolidation Officer submitted a reference, which was accepted by Deputy Director of Consolidation by order dated 25.01.2012. Smt. Zubaida Begum and others filed an application for recall of the order dated 25.01.2012, which was allowed by order dated 19.06.2012 and order dated 25.01.2012 was recalled and matter has been remanded to Consolidation Officer for framing fresh reference after hearing the parties. Consolidation Officer submitted fresh reference which was accepted Deputy Director of Consolidation by order dated 25.08.2012. Mohammad Ehsan Ali Khan and others filed Writ B No. 44667 of 2012, in which interim order dated 03.10.2012 has been granted by this Court. 5. Consolidation Officer submitted fresh reference which was accepted Deputy Director of Consolidation by order dated 25.08.2012. Mohammad Ehsan Ali Khan and others filed Writ B No. 44667 of 2012, in which interim order dated 03.10.2012 has been granted by this Court. 5. Esrar Ali Khan and others filed an application for recalling order dated 04.10.2011 passed in revisions, which was allowed by Deputy Director of Consolidation by order dated 24.06.2012. The revisions were again heard and by order dated 26.02.2013, earlier order dated 04.10.2011 was maintained. Shamshad Ali and others again filed an application dated 31.07.2013 for recalling order dated 26.02.2013, which was allowed and the revisions were dismissed by order dated 04.10.2013. Mohd. Ehsan Ali and others filed Writ B No. 62306 of 2013 against the aforesaid order, which was dismissed by this Court by order dated 13.12.2013. However Consolidation Officer was directed to conclude trial within six months. 6. In the meantime, Consolidation Officer dismissed the objection in default by on 21.06.2007. Mohd. Ehsan Ali and others filed an application on 16.01.2014, for recalling order dated 21.06.2007. Consolidation Officer, by order dated 19.06.2014, recalled the order dated 21.06.2007 and restored the objection. The petitioners filed an appeal (registered as Appeal No. 173/13-14) from the aforesaid order. The appeal was heard by Settlement Officer Consolidation, who by his order dated 13.08.2014, dismissed the appeal. The petitioners filed a revision (registered as Revision No. 389/2014) from the aforesaid order, which was also dismissed by Deputy Director of Consolidation by order dated 28.03.2016. The petitioners filed an application for recalling order dated 28.03.2016, which was rejected by Deputy Director of Consolidation, by order dated 19.05.2016. Hence this writ petition was filed. 7. I have considered the arguments of the counsel for the parties. The order of consolidation Officer dated 21.06.2007 had been superseded by order of Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 04.10.2011, by which dispute has been finally decided and basic year entry was maintained. It is only when Deputy Director of Consolidation, by his order dated 04.10.2013, recalled order dated 04.10.2011, then objection can be said to be again restored. After dismissal of Writ B No. 62306 of 2013 by this Court on 13.12.2013. The parties pursued their objection and formal application for recalling order dated 21.06.2007 was filed which has been rightly allowed. There is no illegality in it. 8. After dismissal of Writ B No. 62306 of 2013 by this Court on 13.12.2013. The parties pursued their objection and formal application for recalling order dated 21.06.2007 was filed which has been rightly allowed. There is no illegality in it. 8. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the writ petition has no merit and is dismissed.