BHOLA NATH Vs. DY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri A. K. Malviya for the petitioners and Sri Shishir Tiwari for respondents - 4 to 8. Notices on behalf of respondents - 1 to 3 has been accepted by Chief Standing Counsel. The counsel for the respondents propose that in the facts of the case, no counter affidavit is required to be filed and the writ petition may be decided finally.

(2.) THE writ petition has been filed against the orders of Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 26.9.2013, Settlement Officer, Consolidation dated 21.11.1994 and Consolidation Officer dated 29.5.1991, passed in the proceedings u/s 9A of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953, relating to correction of area of plot nos. 305, 306, 307 and 349 of village Baladeeh, pargana Soraon, district Allahabad.

(3.) THE counsel for the petitioner submits that since the DDC has recorded a finding that the demarcation line of these plots were dismantled and fresh survey and demarcation was not possible, accordingly, in view of this finding, area of plot no. 307 is also liable to be recorded according to the area as mentioned in the last settlement record. He submits that otherwise, the area of plot no. 307 which was found short and the short area went in plot no. 305 will not be compensated and material prejudice will be caused to the petitioner. He submits that the matter has already been remanded by the SOC to the CO for correcting the area of plot no. 307, which is still pending before Consolidation Officer, who is not proceeding to decide the objection in this respect, although, the case was remanded by the order dated 8.8.2001 and more than 12 years have passed, due to pendency of the revision. As common dispute was raised in respect of all the four plots, as such, the Deputy Director of Consolidation ought to have directed the Consolidation Officer for correcting area of plot no. 307 also.