LAWS(ALL)-2017-5-583

VIRENDRA PRASAD Vs. BAJARANG BALI & OTHERS

Decided On May 17, 2017
VIRENDRA PRASAD Appellant
V/S
Bajarang Bali And Others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Q.M.Haq, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Suresh Chandra Srivastava, learned counsel representing opposite party no.1.

(2.) Late Birendra Prasad, chak holder no.529, who is the predecessor-in-interest of petitioner nos.1/1 to 1/7, was proposed a chak having an area of 11 decimal on gata nos.2750 and 2751. An objection against the said proposal made by the Assistant Consolidation Officer was filed by the chak holder no.529 before the Consolidation Officer under Section 20 (2) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act stating therein that gata no.2748 is situated just in front of his sahan darwaja whereupon chak has been allocated to the respondent no.1-Bajrang Bali, chak holder no.438. It was stated that in plot no.2748, chak holder no.529 has installed hand pump and has also grown some plants. Accordingly, chak holder no.529 prayed before the Consolidation Officer that the chak allotted to him on plot nos. 2750 and 2751 be abolished and in its place he be allotted a chak no.2748. The Consolidation Officer, however, rejected the objection filed by the chak holder no.529 by means of the order dated 06.07.1999 stating therein that the objections preferred by the chak holder no.529 were barred by limitation for the reason that the publication under Section 20 of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act in the village was made long ago i.e.25.03.1991.

(3.) Feeling aggrieved by the said order dated 06.07.1999, an appeal was preferred by late Birendra Prasad, chak holder no.529 before the Settlement Officer, Consolidation under Section 21 (2) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, which has been dismissed by the appellate court by means of the order dated 14.12.1999. The order dated 14.12.1999 was challenged in a revision petition by the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner nos.1/1 to 1/7 before the Deputy Director of Consolidation under Section 48 of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, which too has been dismissed by the revisional court on 29.01.2000.