ASHA RAM Vs. DY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION BANDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is directed against the order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 18.11.1983, setting aside the order of the Settlement Officer, Consolidation and restoring that of the Consolidation Officer.

(2.) THE dispute is as to whether Mst. Jagia had any share in the land In dispute and the sale-deed executed by her in favour of respondents 2 and 3 is valid. THE following pedigree is relevant: <IMG>JUDGEMENT_1297_AWC2_1997Image1.jpg</IMG>

(3.) IN Ram Dular's case (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court only cautioned that the Director of Consolidation cannot assume himself the jurisdiction of original authorities as fact finding authority by appreciating all the facts de novo. The powers of the Deputy Director of Consolidation were not held to be confined to questions of law or any procedural irregularity committed by the subordinate authorities. IN case, any incorrect finding has been recorded, the same can be examined as an appellate authority. Whether the Deputy Director of Consolidation has exceeded his jurisdiction in recording or reversing a finding recorded by an authority subordinate to him is to be considered on facts of each case. IN the present case, the Consolidation Officer had recorded a finding that Mst. Jagia and Mst. Semia were taken as co-tenants of Ram Prasad by acquiescence. This finding was reversed by the Settlement Officer, Consolidation. Respondent No. 1 set aside the order of the Settlement Officer, Consolidation and accepted the findings recorded by the Consolidation Officer. Respondent No. 1 was entitled to examine the legality and correctness of the order passed by the Settlement Officer, Consolidation and on facts, he was entitled to accept the findings which were recorded by the Consolidation Officer.