MUKHTAR Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Consolidation proceedings took place in the village in which the land in dispute lies. Regarding allotment of chaks to the parties in this writ petition an order was passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation on 13-5-1974 which had become final between the parties. Notification under Section 52 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter ' described as the "Act") was issued on 26th November, 1977. On 8th July 1978 an application under Rule 109-A of the Rules framed under the Act (hereinafter described as the "Rules"), was moved by the contesting opposite parties for implementing and giving effect to the order passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 13-5-1974. The Consolidation Officer by his order dated 25th January 1980 rejected the aforesaid application as not maintainable as there had been a notification under Section 52 of the Act in respect of the village. A revision was filed by the contesting opposite parties. The aforesaid revision was allowed and the Consolidation Officer was directed to decide the aforesaid application on merits. The present writ petition has been filed against the aforesaid order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 10-12-1980.

(2.) The present writ petition was first heard by a learned Single Judge and he was of the opinion that the question to be decided in the case was whether after the Gazette notification under Section 52 of the Act an application under Rule 109-A of the Rules was maintainable or not. On the aforesaid question" the learned Single Judge was of the opinion that as two learned Single Judges of this Court have taken contradictory view on this point, matter required reference to a larger Bench for deciding the controversy. It is in these circumstances that " the entire writ petition has been referred to a Division Bench.

(3.) A learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of Raja Ram v. Deputy Director of Consolidation, 1982 AWC 437, has held: