JUBER AHMAD Vs. D.D.C.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri B.L. Mishra for the petitioners and Sri Vijay Bahadur Verma for respondent -3. The writ petition has been filed against the order of Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 27.5.2011 passed in chak allotment proceeding under U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953.

(2.) PLOT Nos. 400 and 596 were the original holdings of the petitioners and their co -sharers. Two of the co -sharers were proposed chaks on plot No. 400 and two of the co -shares were proposed chak on plot No. 596. No one filed any objection against the proposed chaks of the petitioners as such their chaks were confirmed.

(3.) THE Counsel for the petitioners submits that plot No. 596 was the original holding of Israil and Zuber and their two other co -sharers having their total 1/2 share jointly. Two of the co -sharers were allotted chaks on other original holding on plot No. 400 while Zuber and Israil were allotted chaks on plot No. 596. No one has filed any objection against the proposed chaks of the petitioners and their chaks have been confirmed. However, the Deputy Director of Consolidation has illegally disturbed their chaks. He submits that some area of plot No. 596 was allotted in the chak of Smt. Patna Devi as uran chak on this place. In case Smt. Shiv Kumari was claiming her original holding on plot No. 596 chak of Smt. Patna Devi was liable to be disturbed and not the chaks of the petitioners. The order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation disturbing the chaks of the petitioners is illegal.