LAXMI KANT Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in this petition is the judgment of Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 8.8.2003 by which revision filed by the petitioners and their father -Ramdeo has been dismissed and revision filed by contesting respondent was allowed. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Advocate who appeared for respondents.

(2.) PROCEEDINGS are under section 20 of UPCH Act which relates to allotment of chak between the parties. Needless to say that both parties can never be satisfied. It is not possible to satisfy both parties in its entirely and therefore, the concern of this Court should be that whether the petitioner has suffered any prejudice calling for interference or not.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioners besides other grounds raised two main questions. Submission is that the area of petitioners has been reduced to more than 25% which is in violation of section 19 of UPCH Act. Other submission is that while dismissing revision of petitioners and their father, finding was recorded that they are not entitled to further relief as their chaks adjoining to each otherwise has been rightly carved out but while deciding revision of other sides, petitioners' chak has been affected and therefore, petitioners' position has been made more worst.