BALDEO Vs. ASSTT DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION VARANASI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) KRISHNA Murari, J. This writ petition arises out of proceedings under U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act (for short the Act ). The dispute relates to plot No. 93 of Khata No. 177. In the basic year the said khata was recorded in the name of the petitioner respondents No. 3 and 5 filed an objection under Section 9 of the Act that they are in possession over 2. 94 acres of the said plots and have constructed their house, 'nad', 'charan' etc. and are entitled to be recorded in the records after expunging the name of the petitioner. The petitioner contested the claim inter alia on the ground that his name was rightly recorded and the land in dispute was in the nature of Abadi and as such the consolidation authorities had no jurisdiction to adjudicate in respect of the plot in dispute.

(2.) THE Consolidation Officer vide order dated 31-10-1973 directed that name of the petitioner be expunged from the record and the plot in dispute be recorded as Abadi in Class VI of the Khatauni. Against the order of the Consolidation Officer, the petitioner as well as contesting respondent No. 4 both filed appeals which were dismissed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation by a common order dated 18-3-1978. He also found that the land in dispute being Abadi the Consolidation Authorities have no jurisdiction. He however, confirmed the order of the Consolidation Officer directing the name of the petitioner to be expunged on the ground that his name was wrongly recorded. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner went up in revision, the Deputy Director of Consolidation vide order dated 15-2-1982 dismissed the revision.

(3.) IN reply, it has been submitted that mere use of land in question for non-agricultural purposes would not change the nature of the land unless a declaration in this regard is made under Section 143 of U. P. Z. A. and L. R. Act. Unless such a declaration is made the holding continue to retain the character of land and the jurisdiction of Consolidation Court will not be ousted. The second submission advanced by the learned Counsel is that under the provisions of the Consolidation of Holdings Act it is the duty of the authorities to correct the record of rights and even though the plot in dispute may not be covered under the definition of land the authorities are bound by the provisions of the Act to correct the record by expunging the bogus and forged entries.