JUDGMENT Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. Heard Sri P.N. Tripathi for the petitioner and Sri S.C. Tripathi for the respondents. The writ petition has been filed against the orders of Consolidation Officer dated 30.10.2013, Settlement Officer, Consolidation dated 21.2.2014 and Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 6.4.2016 passed in chak allotment proceeding under U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953(hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). The main demand of petitioner before the court below was for deleting his chak on plot no.846/1 and adjusting its valuation in his chak on plot no.1012 and the valuation of plot no.1116 be added in his chak on plot no.1003 etc. Diwakar chakholder No.35, his mother Smt. Kapura Devi and his brother were allotted chak on plot no.1013 etc. and it was not possible to delete their chak from this place. In case chak of the petitioner on plot no.856 is deleted then other chak holders will suffer irreparable loss. Therefore, demand of the petitioner has not been accepted. The main argument of the counsel for the petitioner is that his chak as prepared on plot no.1122 is in the shape of "T" while he was given second chak just after chak road on part of area of plot no.1116. Thus, shape of the chak of the petitioner is not in rectangular shape and the shape was liable to be corrected. I have considered the arguments of the counsel for the petitioner in this respect. A perusal of the map shows that in west and south of plot no.1122 there is abadi land as such shape at this place could not be corrected. It will remain in "T" shape. The petitioner was allotted chak on his original holding. It has been found that other tenure-holders were also allotted chak on their original holding as such they could not be displaced from this place. The finding of fact in this respect cannot be said to be incorrect. So far as the argument that the chak on plot no.846 is at a long distance from the other chaks of the petitioner is concerned, at the last stage this difficulty cannot be removed. On the other hand other chaks of the petitioner are on his original holding. So far as the argument that the chak on plot no.846 is at a long distance from the other chaks of the petitioner is concerned, at the last stage this difficulty cannot be removed. On the other hand other chaks of the petitioner are on his original holding. So far as number of chaks is concerned, second proviso to Section 19(e) of the Act, provides that no consolidation made shall be invalid for the reason merely that the number of chaks allotted to a tenure-holder exceeds three. In such circumstances, no interference is required by this Court. The writ petition has no merit and it is dismissed.