SATYA NARAIN Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 29.3.2019 passed by Deputy Director of Consolidation, Jaunpur in Revision No. 3135 of 2017-18, whereby the revision filed by the petitioner under Section 48 (1) of U.P. Consolidation and Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as an Act), was dismissed.

(2.) Brief facts involved in the present writ petition are that in a proceeding under Section 9A (2) of the Act initiated by the petitioner, an order dated 8.3.2013 was passed by Consolidation Officer, Sadar, Jaunpur, whereby the objection filed by the petitioner was allowed. Against that order, respondent no.4-Shankar and 3 others (respondent nos. 5 to 7) filed an appeal before the Settlement Officer of Consolidation, Jaunpur under Section 11 (1) of the Act, registered as Appeal No. 2202/2016-17, which was allowed vide order dated 18.5.2017.

(3.) Being aggrieved against the order dated 18.5.2017 passed by Settlement Officer of Consolidation, Jaunpur, the petitioner and his brothers filed a revision on 7.6.2017 under Section 48 (1) of the Act, registered as Revision No. 3135/2017-18. Subsequently, an application was filed by respondent no.4 on 16.3.2019 on the ground that revision filed by the petitioner is incompetent as the certified copy of the order passed by Consolidation Officer has not been annexed or filed alongwith memo of revision and therefore, in view of Rule 111 of U.P.C.H. Rules, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as Rules), the memo of revision be rejected as incompetent and defective and barred by provisions of Rule 111 of the Rules.