SADHU LAL Vs. D.D.C.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In view of the office report, service upon the respondent nos. 2 to 6 is deemed sufficient.

(2.) Petitioner is the sole legal heir of Jamuna Devi and Lakhan who were having agriculture holding in village Pasgawan, Pargana Jamaur, Tehsil Sadar, District Sahajanpur, which is reflected in Form CH23. Jamuna Devi died on 20 May 2003 and Lakhan died on 27 July 2005. During consolidation proceedings chak no. 279 and chak no. 1058 was prepared for Jamuna Devi and Lakhan respectively. It appears that certain objections were filed under Sec. 9A(2) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (Act) which was decided by the Consolidation Officer on 12 Feb. 2009, whereby, some land of the original holding of the petitioner was taken out and chaks allotted to other members. Petitioner being unaware of the proceedings did not challenge the order. Aggrieved persons filed appeal being Appeal No. 76, wherein, neither Lakhan/Jamuna Devi nor the petitioner was impleaded which was allowed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation on 28 May 2009 along with other appeals. Aggrieved, the second respondent, holder of chak no. 792, filed a revision under Sec. 48 of the Act, wherein, parties to the appeal were not arrayed as parties, however, Jamuna Devi and Lakhan, who had died were impleaded and some other persons were made a party who were not before the appellate authority.

(3.) The process server submitted a report on 25 Sept. 2009 that Jamuna Devi and Lakhan were reported dead, however, despite the report, their legal heirs (petitioner) was neither impleaded nor was he aware of the proceedings. The revisional authority did not direct that the legal heirs of the Jamuna Devi and Lakhan be brought on record despite the report. The revisional authority by the impugned order dated 21 Nov. 2009 allowed the revision, whereby, the entire original holding of the petitioner was changed and low lying area was allotted to the petitioner.