RAM DULAR Vs. D D C

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Rajeev Misra learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents and Sri Namit Srivastava who has been permitted to intervene in the matter as he had filed an impleadment application on behalf of one Chutai. This impleadment was sought on the ground that by the applicant was in possession of Plot no. 303, 306, 307 and 308 which had been allotted in favour of the petitioner by an order passed exparte against him, in collusion with the Gaon Sabha and the consolidation authorities. However, this impleadment application was pending and during its pendency, the person seeking impleadment died and a subsequent application being Application no. 275402 of 2013, to bring on record his heirs, is also pending disposal.

(2.) Since I have heard the counsel representing the applicant Chutai and his heirs, no further orders are required to be passed on either the impleadment application or the substitution application filed therein which are consigned to the record.

(3.) Admittedly, the writ petition arises out of an objection under Section 23 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act and seeks quashing of the order dated 25.09.1997 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation (annexure 8 to the writ petition).