LALITA DEVI Vs. D.D.C.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri S.K. Lal, learned counsel for petitioner, Sri Virendra Singh, learned counsel for respondent No. 2 and Sri Sharad Chandra Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that petitioner is a chak holder of chak No. 529 and respondent No. 2 is chak holder of chak No. 430. Petitioner was pro-posed Ist chak on plot No. 1149 etc., IInd chak on plot Nos. 995/2, 1047/3, IIIrd chak on plot Nos. 835/1, 866/2, 867/2. Respondent No. 2 was proposed Ist chak on plot No. 815/7 etc. and IInd chak on plot Nos. 834/1, 834/5, 867/2,867/3. In reference proceeding under Sec. 48(3) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (herein after referred to as U.P.C.H. Act), an order was passed on 27/12/1995, in which petitioner was adjusted on plot No. 867/2. Against the order of reference dtd. 27/12/1995 a time barred restoration application dtd. 25/7/2002 was filed on behalf of respondent No. 2 along with prayer for condonation of delay praying that order of reference should be set aside and plot No. 867/2 area 3 Biswa should be taken out from the chak of petitioner and it should be allotted to respondent No. 2. Against the restoration application dtd. 25/7/2002, objection dtd. 4/12/2002 was filed on behalf of the petitioner stating that restoration application is not maintainable as respondent No. 2-Radha Devi has no locus to file application against the order of reference by which petitioner was adjusted from Bachat plot. Deputy Di-rector of Consolidation vide order dtd. 2/1/2003 allowed the restoration application dtd. 25/7/2002 setting aside the order dtd. 27/12/1995 and restored the reference proceeding on its original number. Hence, this writ petition on behalf of petitioner for the following reliefs :

(3.) This Court entertained the matter on 17/1/2003 and stayed the operation of order dtd. 2/1/2003 passed by Deputy Director of Consolidation. In pursuance of the order of this Court, the parties have exchanged their pleadings.