MOHAN Vs. SETTLEMENT OFFICER CONSOLIDATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Prayer in this petition is to issue writ in the nature of prohibition, prohibiting the appellate authority to entertain and decide the appeal Nos. 384 and 791 (Annexures-1 and 2 respectively to the writ petition).

(2.) Facts in brief will be useful to be noticed for disposal of this petition. Against the judgment of the Consolidation Officer dated 2.5.1986 passed in case No. 1135/1136 in a proceeding under Section 9A (2) of the U.P.C.H. Act, two appeals referred above came to be filed before the Settlement Officer Consolidation. One appeal was filed by Ram Karan and others and other appeal by the State. It is in respect to the aforesaid appeals, submission of counsel for the petitioners is that continuance of the appeal is an abuse of process and thus they may be directed not to be proceeded and respondents may be directed to withdraw the appeals.

(3.) Submission is that appeals filed by the respondents were barred by time and there is no prayer for condonation of delay and in fact there is no application for condonation of delay. It is also submitted that there is no order of Collector for the District Government counsel to file the appeal and the memo does not bear the signature of the Collector. Various averments in this respect are contained in paras 7 to 10 of the writ petition. Submission is that appeals filed by the respondent No. 3 and the State are incompetent and they could not have been entertained by the respondents 1 and 2. In the last it was submitted that Gaon Sabha withdrew its objection against the petitioner and, therefore, the appeal filed against the order of the Consolidation Officer cannot be said to be maintainable.