SANJAY KUMAR Vs. SANJAY KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record on board.

(2.) Aggrieved with the order dtd. 27/3/2023 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation in Revision No. 2015530149000043 under Sec. 48(1) of UP Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1950 (in brevity 'UPCH Act'), reversing the order dtd. 28/9/2002 passed by the Settlement Officer of Consolidation in appeal No. 438 under Sec. 11(1) of UPCH Act whereby delay caused in filing the appeal has been condoned on the cost of Rs.100.00 and date is fixed for hearing the appeal on merits, petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

(3.) Having considered the rival submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and perusal of record, it is manifested that instant writ petition has arisen from delay condonation in filing the appeal before the Settlement Officer of Consolidation. In basic consolidation record, names of Kanhaiya Lal and Shiv Prasad (predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners) were recorded. One Angad Rai (father of respondent No. 4) has filed an objection under Sec. 9-A(2) of UPCH Act claiming his right and title over the property in question on the basis of sale deed said to have been executed by Kanhaiya Lal. The Consolidation Officer, vide order dtd. 30/7/1970, has allowed the objection under Sec. 9-A(2) of UPCH Act and passed an order to record the name of Aangad Rai and others in place of recorded tenure holders. At belated stage, after the death of Kanhaiya Lal, an appeal dtd. 21/7/1982 has been preferred on behalf of his son, namely, Sanjay Kumar (minor) under the guardianship of his mother Smt. Prema Devi wife of Kanhaiya Lal. The Settlement Officer of Consolidation, vide order dtd. 15/11/1989, has condoned the delay in filing the appeal and, simultaneously, allowed the appeal on merits whereby the parties were relegated before the Consolidation Officer to get the matter decided afresh. The Deputy Director of Consolidation, on revision being filed on behalf of the Angad Rai, has reversed the order passed by the Settlement Officer of Consolidation and relegated the parties, at the appellate stage to decide the point of delay first caused in filing the appeal, before deciding its merits. In pursuance of the remand order dtd. 5/6/1999 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, the matter has been scrutinized on the point of delay, as such, the Settlement Officer of Consolidation, vide order dtd. 28/9/2002, has condoned the delay in filing the appeal on the cost of Rs.100.00. Having been aggrieved with the order dtd. 28/9/2002 passed by the Settlement Officer of Consolidation, Subhash Kumar (respondent No. 4) and others have preferred revision. The Deputy Director of Consolation, vide order dtd. 27/3/2003, has allowed the revision and quashed the delay condonation order passed by the Settlement Officer of Consolidation, which gives rise a cause of action for filing the instant writ petition.