SUBHAS SINGH Vs. DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION, AMBEDKARNAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for petitioners, learned State Counsel for opposite party No.1 and Mr. Mohan Singh learned counsel for opposite party No.16. In view of order being passed, notices to opposite parties 2 to 15 stand dispensed with.

(2.) Petitioners have challenged the order dated 9th March, 2021 passed in revision No. 629/1027 whereby the interim order granted earlier has not been extended. It is submitted that private opposite parties had filed petition under section 9(A) of the Consolidation of Holdings Act which was allowed and against which the petitioners had filed an appeal before the Settlement Officer, Consolidation which was also dismissed vide order dated 11th February, 2021 which was challenged by the petitioners in revision before the Deputy Director of Consolidation. It is submitted that initially vide order dated 2nd March, 2021, interim orders were passed in revision staying proceedings pending in terms of Rule 109 of the Rules framed under the Act. The next date fixed was 6th March, 2021 but the matter was actually heard on 9th March, 2021 but the interim order granted earlier was not extended.

(3.) Learned counsel for petitioner submits that a perusal of the impugned order will indicate that absolutely no reasons have been recorded for not extending the interim order which even otherwise would have net result of vacating the interim order granted earlier. It is also submitted that once the proceedings under section 9-A of the Act have yet not concluded and revision against the orders passed by the Consolidation Officer and the Settlement Officer, Consolidation is pending consideration before the Deputy Director of Consolidation in revision, there was no occasion for the non extension of the interim order.