J M GARG Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Tapan Singh, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. R.C. Arya, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand.

(2.) THE petitioner has an agricultural land in village Sekhpuri, Pargana Manglour, Tehsil Laksar, District Haridwar. In the said village there has been a notification under Section 4 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 from hereinafter referred to as the "Act") declaring that consolidation processes will commence in the said village. However, inspite of the fact that the notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued as far back as in the year 2003, no further proceeding has been initiated as yet, which is causing a lot of hardship to the petitioner.

(3.) ON the last occasion, State counsel was asked to file counter affidavit, which has been filed. In the counter affidavit, the State has taken a stand that there are complaints from various quarters of the villagers that they do not want the consolidation in the area, and the Government is seriously thinking for cancellation of notification issued under Section 4, for which there is a provision under Section 6 of the Act. Section 6 of the Act reads as under :