SHYAMA VIDHYA NIKETAN Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. In both these cases similar controversy is involved and therefore, a common judgement is being passed. Both these writ petitions arise out of an objection under Section 9A (2) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act allegedly filed by the petitioners and is directed against the order dated 01.01.2002 passed by the Consolidation Officer, Dibiyapur, District Auraiya.

(2.) It appears that on an objection filed under Section 9-A (2) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, the Consolidation Officer passed an order dated 20.10.1989 regarding plot no. 40/2/1 area (1.40 Acre).

(3.) The petitioners filed the aforesaid objection claiming to be a Registered Society, duly registered under the Societies Registration Act which was running as an educational institution. The plot in question namely plot no. 40/2/1 was recorded as Usar in the revenue record of Village Umri, Dibiyapur, Etawah (now District Auraiya) in the basic year Khatauni. This plot on the objection of the petitioners was reserved for play ground and Agriculture Farm by the Consolidation Officer because even the Gaon Sabha had no objection to such reservation.