Hon’ble Ritu Raj Awasthi, J.—Notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 has been accepted by the learned Chief Standing Counsel. Mr. N.K. Seth, learned senior advocate assisted by Mr. Vijay Krishna has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No. 3.

2. For the order proposed to be passed, there is no need to issue notices to respondent Nos. 4 and 4, hence notices to them are hereby dispensed with.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

4. The writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 3.7.2015 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Faizabad in Reference No. 213 as contained in Annexure-1 to writ petition.

5. As per given facts of the case, Village Janaura, Pargana - Haveli Awadh was notified for consolidation operation under Section 41 U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act (for short ‘the Act’) sometime in the year 1968. The Assistant Consolidation Officer during preparation of Khasra Chak bandi of each plot as well as revision of the map, found that there is a tube-well and temporary construction on one biswa land of old plot No. 639. He vide order dated 24.11.1971 declared the said one biswa land of plot No. 639 as chak out. After completion of the consolidation proceedings, notification under Section 52 of the Act was issued sometime in the year 1975. The petitioner on 11.2.2013 had moved an application under Section 42-A of the Act before the Consolidation Officer for correction in the map. The Consolidation Officer vide order dated 17.2.2014 had made reference under Section 48 (3) of the Act before the Deputy Director of Consolidation as he was of the opinion that since notification under Section 52 of the Act has already been issued and a considerable long time has passed, as such, he has no jurisdiction to pass any order under Section 42-A of the Act.

6. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that in this regard the Assistant Consolidation Officer had submitted his report dated 24.1.2015 before the Consolidation Officer in which it was specifically mentioned that incorporation of one biswa land that was declared as abadi land by order dated 24.11.1971 shall be incorporated in Gata No. 195/1337, it was not correctly mentioned in the map. The reference was ultimately decided by the Deputy Director of Consolidation by the impugned order wherein he has rejected the same on the ground that after issuance of notification under Section 52 of the Act, 39-40 years have passed when the application was preferred which is highly time barred. The petitioner could get the necessary correction made by availing the remedy under Section 28 U.P. Land Revenue Act.

7. Submission is that there is no bar that application under Section 42-A of the Act cannot be entertained after issuance of notification under Section 52 of the Act. It is also submitted that there is no limitation prescribed to move the application under Section 42-A of the Act, as such, it cannot be termed as time barred.

8. In support of his submissions, learned counsel for petitioner relies on the judgment of this Court in the case of Pooran Singh v. Deputy Director of Consolidation, Meerut and others, 2008(10) ADJ 497, particularly paragraph 8. He also relies on the judgment of this Court in the case of Dr. Sukhbeer Singh v. Commissioner, Meerut and others, 2014(5) ADJ 324, wherein it has been held that if the map is not according to the final order then it can be corrected either under Section 42-A read with Section 52 (2) and Rule 109-A of the Act or under Section 28 U.P. Land Revenue Act. The mistake cannot be permitted to continue in the revenue records.

9. Mr. N.K. Seth, learned senior advocate appearing for respondent No. 3 submits that the application preferred under Section 42-A of the Act for correction in the map by the petitioner was not maintainable, once the notification under Section 52 of the Act for denotifying the consolidation operation was issued. It is submitted that the law is well-settled in this regard. The Divisio