KRISHNA KUMAR Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MATTER is taken in the revised cause list. None appeared on behalf of the respondents. Heard Shri Pankaj Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned State Counsel and perused the record. Facts in brief of the present case are that the controversy involved in the present case relates to Khata No.385 recorded in the name of father of the petitioner. Thereafter, in respect of the land in question certain dispute has arisen and the matter came up for consideration before the Consolidation Officer who has passed an order dated 3.1.1991 (Annexure No.2).

(2.) AGGRIEVED by the said order, an appeal bearing Appeal No.310/970 has been filed, allowed by order dated 27.5.1993 (Annexure No.3). Lastly, the matter came up for consideration before the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Hardoi in revision bearing Revision No.836/? 776/ 709/ 682/690/507 under Section 48 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, dismissed by judgment and order dated 29.10.1999 (Annexure No.1) and the matter was remanded to the Consolidation Officer to decide the same. On 16.12.1999, this Court passed an interim order, on reproduction reads as under:-

(3.) THE first question which arises for consideration is to whether under Section 48 of the Act, the Deputy Director of Consolidation in exercise of his powers of revision, can upset the findings recorded by the Consolidation Officer and the Settlement Officer. Section 48 of the Act was amended by amendment Act 8 of 1963. Before its amendment Section 48 read as under: