DINESH SINGH Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Kailash Nath Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State and perused the record.

(2.) In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, this petition is being decided finally without calling for the counter and rejoinder affidavits of the concerned parties, with the consent of learned counsel for the respondents, with a liberty to the contesting respondents to move a recall applications, in case it is found that any facts or details given by the petitioner are incorrect

(3.) Challenge in the present writ petition is order dtd. 25/2/2016, said to have been passed by Consolidation Officer in case no. 883 + 890(Ram Bachan and others Vs. State), under Sec. 9A(2) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953(in brevity "U.P.C.H. Act") with respect to the property in question situated in Village Pilkhini, Pargana Saremu, Tehsil Sadar, District- Jaunpur.