VIKRAM Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION BARABANKI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Ram Shanker opposite party no. 3 in person.

(2.) None appeared for the other opposite parties no. 4 and 5.

(3.) The facts of the case in brief are that the original holding of the petitioner comprised of Plot No. 738 (0.0494 hectares ⅓ share); 749/1(.0909⅓ share); 885M.(.075⅓ share) and 888. During consolidation operations at the A.C.O. level instead of land at Gata No. 885 Chak was proposed to the petitioner at Gata No. 884 in which the opposite party no. 3 herein had ' share having purchased the same by sale deed from the recorded tenure holder. Being aggrieved, as the petitioner was not given Chak at Gata No. 885 instead was given the same at Gata No. 884 which was not his original holding, but, the original holding of the opposite party no. 3, he filed objections before the Consolidation Officer. The Consolidation Officer rejected the objections of the petitioner on the ground that the said Gata No. 884 had already been taken into consideration and had been affected by another order dated 30.12.2006. The petitioner herein did not file any appeal under Section 11(1) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 before the S.O.C. against the order of the C.O. dated 21.07.2007, however, the opposite party no. 3 filed an appeal claiming reallocation of his Chak at Gata No. 885 which was his original holding also as he had ⅓ share therein being a co-sharer with the petitioner accordingly. The S.O.C. on the mere asking of the opposite party no. 3 accepted the contention and allowed the appeal. It is at this stage that the petitioner became aggrieved, as, the part of Gata No. 885 which was in his possession was given to the opposite party no. It is in this context that the revision was filed by the petitioner, but, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner the same has also been rejected cursorily without assigning any reason and without any application of mind just as it was done by the Appellate Court.