GHAMARI Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner prays for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the orders dated 16.12.1980, 27.1.1981 and 31.8.1982 passed by the authorities below in the proceedings under Section 42A of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (for short the 'the Act').

(3.) It appears that an application was filed by the contesting respondent No. 3 under Section 42A of the Act before the Settlement Officer, Consolidation claiming that plot No. 577/2, equivalent to plot No. 311, was originally allotted to the said respondent but wrongly continued to be recorded in the name of the petitioner. The said plot, according to him, was liable to be recorded in his name after expunging the name of the petitioner from the revenue papers. The application filed by the said contesting respondent was opposed by the petitioner. It was contended that the application filed by him was legally not maintainable. It was also urged that the authorities below had no jurisdiction to entertain the said application and the application filed by the said respondent was liable to be dismissed as not maintainable. According to him, the provisions of Sub-section (2) of Section 52 of the Act and Rule 109A of the Rules framed under the Act had no application in the present case as the village where the land in dispute is situated was denotified under Section 52 of the Act long back before filing the aforesaid application. The Settlement Officer, Consolidation sent for the report of the Consolidation Officer. The Consolidation Officer submitted a report after perusing the material on the record as well as after hearing the parties before the Settlement Officer, Consolidation on 7.12.1980. The Settlement Officer, Consolidation accepted the report of the Consolidation Officer and allowed the application by his order dated 27.1.1981. The petitioner thereafter preferred a revision before the Deputy Director of Consolidation, which was dismissed by his order dated 31.8.1982, hence the present petition.