RAM PRATAP Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. S.N. Singh holding the brief of Mr. D.S. Pandey, Counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Shamim Ahmad for respondent No. 3, learned Standing Counsel for the Staterespondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Mr. Azad Rai for respondent No. 4, Gaon Sabha.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that plot No. 2183 area 5 Bigha 9 Biswa sitauted in Village Shah, Pargana Ayahshah, Tehsil and District Fatehpur was recorded in the name of Jagdev Singh, Krishna Pal Singh s/o of Manna Singh, Virendra Singh (Minor) under guardianship of his mother Smt. Pan Kumari. A sale deed was executed on 9/2/1989 in favour of Surjan, Sri Pat son of Bhura and Chotu son of Teja by Jagdev Singh and Krishna Pal Singh. On the basis of aforesaid sale deed, Assistant Consolidation Officer vide order dtd. 23/5/1989 in Case No. 149 u/s 12 of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act ordered to record the name of vendees Surjan, Sri Pat and Chotu after expunging the name of vendor Jagdev Singh and others. After the order dtd. 23/5/1989 passed in the proceeding u/s 12, petitioners filed an objection u/s 20 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act which was decided on 6/11/1991 and petitioners' father was allotted plot Nos. 2481M, 2480M, 2478/1M and 2479M total four plots area 0.142 hectare. Petitioners came in possession after death of his father in respect of aforementioned plots in the month of February, 2015, respondent No. 3 started interference with the possession of the petitioner on the basis of the order passed on 5/12/1989 by the Consolidation Officer in reference proceeding accordingly petitioners filed revision under Sec. 48 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act against the order dtd. 5/12/1989. In the memo of revision specific ground has been taken that the order dtd. 5/12/1999 is illegal and no notice/ opportunity has been given to the petitioner, as such, the right of the petitioners cannot be disturbed on the basis of illegal order which is liable be set aside. The Deputy Director of Consolidation vide impugned order dtd. 19/3/2020 dismissed the revision on the ground of limitation. Hence this writ petition.

(3.) This Court on 17/6/2020 passed the following order, the order runs as follows :