BRINDRA Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Anand Prakash Pandey for the petitioners and Sri Manish Kumar Tiwari for the respondents.

(2.) THE writ petition has been filed against the order of Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 13.9.2013 by which the revision filed by the respondents, has been allowed and the order of Consolidation Officer dated 12.10.2011 was set aside.

(3.) THE counsel for the petitioners states that at the time of death of the father, the petitioners were minors, as such, on attaining the age of majority, the objection has been filed by them. He further submits that as the forgery has been committed in the records, as such, the proceedings of earlier consolidation on the basis of forged entry, are vitiated and in such circumstances, the CO has rightly condoned the delay by order dated 12.10.2011. He further submits that the bar applied u/s 49 does not effect the jurisdiction of the consolidation authorities. It only effects the jurisdiction of civil court as well as revenue court. In such circumstances, the delay was rightly condoned, but the DDC has illegally interfered in the matter and set aside the order of CO.