RAJESH RAWAT Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Ashwini Kumar Mishra learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vinod Sinha for the respondent No. 4. This litigation has a chequered history in relation to allotment of chaks in proceedings under the U.P.C.H. Act, 1953.

(2.) The objections filed by the petitioners were allowed by the Consolidation Officer on 4.6.2008. While allowing the objections the Consolidation Officer allotted plot Nos. 928 and 929 to the petitioners as well. The petitioners were aggrieved and they filed an appeal to that extent which was rejected on 7.11.2008. Two revisions were filed one by Bhuley Singh and the other by Prakasho Devi. The petitioners at the stage of the appeal were represented by one Jai Prakash Yadav, Advocate. Jai Prakash Yadav also represented Bhuley Singh and the revision which was filed on his behalf was through Jai Prakash Yadav inspite of the fact that the petitioners were the respondents in the said revision. The revision was filed by Jai Prakash Yadav on behalf of Prakasho Devi also where the petitioners were respondents. The revision was allowed on 27.11.2009.

(3.) Two restoration applications were filed in both the revisions and the petitioners also filed their revision against the order dated 7.11.2008. These restoration applications and the revision were heard and orders were reserved thereon but dates came to be fixed thereafter and ultimately the order sheet which has been filed indicates that the parties entered into a compromise on the strength whereof the revision and the restoration application filed by the petitioners came to be disposed of vide order dated 20.5.2010.