RAM KUNVAR Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Supplementaryaffidavit filed on behalf of the petitioners is taken on record.

(2.) Heard Mr. Vimal Chaudhary, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Ashish Chand Nishad, learned Standing Counsel for the Staterespondents and Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for respondentGaon Sabha.

(3.) Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner No. 1 is chak holder No. 731 and petitioner No. 2 is chak holder No. 212. Original holding of the petitioner are 206 etc. The share of the petitioners over plot No. 206 is 1/6. Plot No. 206 is stated to be road side plot. Assistant Consolidation Officer has proposed two chaks to the petitioners. The first chak over plot No. 575M, 574M area 0.264 hectare and second chak over plot No. 206M area 0.470 hectare. Respondent No. 12 is chak holder No. 941 and original holding of respondent No. 12 are plot No. 206 etc. having 1/6 share. The chak objection filed against the proposal of the Assistant Consolidation Officer was decided by the Consolidation Officer and chak appeal filed against the order of Consolidation Officer was decided by Settlement Officer of Consolidation. The chak revision under Sec. 48 of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as "U.P.C.H. Act") has been filed by the contesting respondent, which was initially allowed vide order dtd. 18/10/2022. Against the order dtd. 18/10/2022, restoration application was filed by the petitioners which has resulted into the impugned order dtd. 16/11/2023 by which the revision filed by the contesting respondent has been allowed adjusting the petitioner and contesting respondents to road side plot No. 206 according to their share, hence this writ petition on behalf of the petitioners challenging the impugned revisional order dtd. 16/11/2023.