KEDAR NATH SINGH Vs. D D C

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Shri Pradeep Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Manoj Kumar Yadav, who appears for the Gaon Sabha and as also the learned Standing Counsel for the State Respondents.

(2.) IT has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in proceedings under Section 42 -A of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, a report was submitted by the Consolidator. On the said report of the aforesaid the ACO passed an order on 31.1.2011 that notices be issued. Subsequently on the same date, an order has been passed by the Consolidation Officer which is adverse to the petitioners. By this order, certain plots which were land covered by Section 132 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act and had been allotted the chak of the petitioners have been ordered to be recorded as Pokhri, Tall, Bheeta, Sarak and bachat land.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the order is an ex parte and the same could not have been passed without any notice or information to the petitioners. He further contends that the once ACO had directed issuance of the notice on 31.1.2011 itself, it is not open for the Consolidation Officer to having passed an order without notice having being issued and served.