SADHU SINGH Vs. JOINT DIRECTOR CONSOLIDATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition brings to this Court some dispute relating to allotment of Chaks pursuant to the consolidation proceedings in village Turki under Chenari police station in the district of Rohtas. It appears that at the draft stage the petitioner was given chak Nos. 81/GA 1, 2 and 3 whereas respondents 4 and 5 were given Chak No. 66/11. Respondent No. 6 filed an objection before the Consolidation Officer and on his objection, Chak No. 66/11, initially allotted to respondents 4 and 5 were taken away from them and some other chak was given to them in its place. The re-allotment of chaks had also affected the petitioner to the extent that 81/GA (2) initially allotted to the petitioner was given to respondent No.6. The dispute arising from the re-allotment of chak was finally taken by respondents 4 and 5 to the Joint Director Consolidation who found that the final arrangement made by the Consolidation Officer was in accordance with law and the amendments made by the appellate authority were untenable. He accordingly set aside the appellate order and directed that respondents 4 and 5 be given chak No. 66/2 adjacent south to chak No. 55/3 and thereafter chak No. 81/2 Ga should be constituted which would go to the petitioner. He accordingly directed the corrections be made in the chak panji and chak map.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner made long submissions regarding the injuries sustained by the petitioner and inconveniences caused to him on account of the directions given by the Joint Director Consolidation in the impugned order. All the submissions are purely based on facts and unfortunately it is not possible for this Court to go into the factual details concerning the allotment of chaks in a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution.

(3.) When it was pointed out to the Counsel, he submitted that the chaks were finally allotted under Section 12 and the scheme had been confirmed under Section 13 of the Act; delivery of possession of the respective chaks had been given to the tenants and the tenants were in possession of their respective chaks and at that state it was no longer open to the Joint Director Consolidation to pass any orders effecting any alterations or changes in the allotment of chaks.