BIKAU Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition arises out of chak allotment proceedings. The petitioner is chak holder of plot No. 950 and he respondent No. 2 is the chak holder of plot No. 2000. The petitioner was proposed allotment of two chaks one on plot No. 2762 and other on plot No. 3733. Objections under Sec. 20 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act were filed by the respondent No. 2, which were rejected by the Consolidation Officer on the ground that it was belated. Against the order of the Consolidation Officer revision was filed by the respondent No. 2 and has been allowed by the Deputy Director Consolidation by his impugned order dated 16.4.1996. The finding is that the petitioner and the respondent No. 2 are co-tenants and the petitioner was allotted land on the road side, which is of high commercial value whereas the respondent No. 2 has not been allotted land on the road side.

(2.) Sri R.C. Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the tube-well installed by the petitioner has been taken out from this chak and has been given to the respondent No. 2 and that the Deputy Director Consolidation has not considered the loss, which has been occasioned to the petitioner by the changes made by him. It is also submitted. that the respondent No. 2 was allotted land near the abadi and the petitioner was allotted (sic) already been well balanced and there was no reason for interfering with the chaks. It appears that this aspect of the matter has not been considered by the Deputy Director Consolidation. As it is a factual matter no opinion upon the merits of the contention is being expressed by this Court.

(3.) It is, therefore, appropriate that the case should go back, to the Deputy Director of Consolidation to considered the case of the parties afresh as to proper adjustment of the chaks and the loss, if any that may be occasioned to the petitioner. The Deputy Director of Consolidation shall consider the contentions that may be advanced by the parties Counsel. No other submission made by the Counsel for the petitioners. The writ petition is allowed. The Deputy-Director of Consolidation shall decide the case within a period of six months from the date a certified copy of this order is filed before him. Petition allowed.