RAM DAS DUBEY Vs. ADDL. COLLECTOR (FINANCE & REVENUE)/DY. DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION, GORAKHPUR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of this writ petition, challenge is to the judgment of Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 13.3.1996 by which in a reference proceeding, rasta has been provided to respondent No. 5.

(2.) Learned Counsel for both parties have been heard.

(3.) Submission of learned Counsel for petitioner is that for providing a rasta to an individual chak holder, there is no provision in Consolidation of Holdings Act and therefore, the Deputy Director of Consolidation in providing rasta/chak road to respondent No. 5 has committed manifest error. Submission is that land in dispute over which rasta has been provided is the abadi of petitioner which has been declared as such in the civil suit and therefore, the Deputy Director of Consolidation in passing impugned order has committed error. In support of his submission that an individual chak holder cannot be provided rasta, reliance has been placed on the judgment of this Court given in the case of Sri-pat Vs. Haridwar, 1980 RD 107, Ram Murat Vs. Mata Saran, 1983 RR 43, and Udai Bhati Dubey Vs. Sahayak Sanchalak Chakbandi,1982 RD 246.