INTZAR Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel.

(2.) Challenge in this petition is the order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 17.8.2001 (Annexure-5 to the writ petition) by which during pendency of the revision against the order of the appellate authority passed in the allotment of chak proceedings he granted stay to the revisionists to the effect that parties will maintain status quo and order dated 20.9.2004 by which order dated 17.8.2001 was confirmed.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner raised four points for consideration which can be summarised thus : (1) Unless and until order of the Settlement Officer, Consolidation is implemented and delivery of possession takes place, stay order cannot be granted. (2) Even there may be a peculiar fact but the Deputy Director of Consolidation cannot grant any stay. (3) Section 28 of the U.P.C.H. Act speaks about delivery of possession within a period of six months and if it is not done it has been mentioned that delivery of possession will be deemed to have taken place and therefore there may not be any occasion to grant stay. (4) On accpunt of stay order granted by the revisional court petitioner has been deprived of getting any land in his possession. On consideration of all the aforesaid arguments this Court finds no substance in either of them for the reasons indicated herein.