RAJJI Vs. D.D.C.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. L.K. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Sharad Chandra Singh, leaned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State respondents and Mr. Pradeep Singh, learned counsel for the Gaon Sabha.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that petitioner is chak holder No. 133. Original holding of the petitioner as mentioned in C.H. Form 23 part-1 is plot No.

(3.) Assistant Consolidation Officer has proposed two chaks to the petitioner, first chak on plot Nos. 82/3, 88/4, 90/1, 90/3 and second chak on plot No. 32/3, 37/2, 37/3 and 37/4. Petitioner was satisfied with the proposal made by Assistant consolidation Officer. Respondent No. 3/Gram Sabha has also not filed any chak objection. Proposal of Assis-tant consolidation Officer was confirmed by Consolidation Officer. Three appeals under Sec. 21 (2) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the U.P.C.H. Act) were filed before Settlement Officer of Consolidation, which were registered as Appeal No. 489 (Gram Sabha v. State), 483 (Gram Sabha v. State) and 467 (Ramyagya v. Ram Yash). Petitioner's chak has been affected by the order dtd. 22/7/1981 passed by Settlement Officer Consolidation in appeal No. 489. Against the appellate order dtd. 22/7/1981 passed in appeal No. 489, revi-sion under Sec. 48 of U.P.C.H. Act was filed by petitioner with the prayer that stage of Assistant Consolidation Officer be maintained. One more revision was filed by Bhagan under Sec. 48 of U.P.C.H. Act. The Deputy Director of Consolidation vide order dtd. 8/12/1981 has dismissed the petitioner's revision as well as revision filed by op-posite party. Hence, this writ petition filed for the following relief:-