VISHESDATT Vs. D.D.C. AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As the pleadings are complete and insisted by learned Counsel for the parties, matter is being heard and finally decided.

(2.) Challenge in this petition is the judgment of Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 12.10.2004 and that of the appellate authority dated 21.6.2004. There appears to be no dispute about certain facts on the submission of learned Counsel for the parties.

(3.) Submission is that by the judgment dated 8.7.1982, appeals in allotment of chak proceedings were decided and petitioner's appeal was allowed and he was given a single chak on his original plot. It is further submitted that the appeal filed by the father of respondents No. 3 to 8, was also partly allowed and the matter became final. After about 20 years, it is said that a restoration application was filed and at the same time an appeal was filed in respect to the order of the Consolidation Officer dated 1.3.2000. Submission is that the appellate authority by impugned order dated 21.6.2004 set aside the order of the Consolidation Officer dated 1.3.2000 but at the same time, made drastic change in chak more than two dozen persons in which, petitioner has also been seriously affected. The claim is that petitioner has been placed at 3-4 place in different directions and that too not on his original holding thus the petitioner lias suffered prejudice. The Revisional Court has also not considered this aspect. On the aforesaid, claim is that the matter be sent to the Revisional Court to do the needful.