SANTOSH DEVI Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. S.K. Pundir, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Sunil Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 5, 12 and 13 and Mr. Ashutosh Kumar Rai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that petitioner No. 1 is chak holder No. 50- Sa, petitioner No. 2 is chak holder No. 50-Sa, petitioner No. 3 is chak holder No. 50-Ba, respondent No. 4 is chak holder No. 381, respondent No. 5 is chak holder No. 1003, respondent No. 6 is chak holder No. 526, respondent No. 7 is chak holder No. 426, respondent No. 8 is chak holder No. 418, respondent No. 9 is chak holder No. 604, respondent No. 10 is chak holder No. 759, respondent No. 11 is chak holder No. 210 and respondent No. 12 is chak holder No. 907. Assistant Consolidation Officer proposed first chak to petitioners on plot No. 955 etc. and second chak was proposed on plot No. 713 etc. Plot No. 1344 is the largest original roadside holding of the petitioners but petitioners have not been proposed chak over their largest original roadside plot of the petitioners (Aplana-Yamuna Nagar Road). The share of petitioners in the aforementioned largest original roadside plot is 1/2. Petitioners filed chak objection under Sec. 21 (1) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 hereinafter referred to as U.P.C.H. Act claiming allotment over largest original roadside plot No. 1344. Consolidation Officer vide order dtd. 9/4/2010 dismissed the petitioners' chak objection. Petitioners filed chak appeal against the order dtd. 9/4/2010 under Sec. 21 (2) of the U.P.C.H. Act which was dismissed by Settlement Officer of Consolidation vide order dtd. 26/10/2010. Revision filed by petitioners have also been dismissed vide order dtd. 3/12/2011 hence this writ petition for the following relief:-

(3.) This Court entertained the matter on 2/3/2012 and granted interim order.