Back
2015 Supreme(All) 3334
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Ram Surat Ram (Maurya), J.
Om Prakash - Appellant
Versus
Dy. Director Of Consolidation Mau and Others - Respondent
Writ B No. 3565 of 2015
Decided On : 24-02-2015
For the Petitioner: Suresh Kumar Srivastava, Amish Srivastava
For the Respondent: C.S.C.,R.N. Singh Yadav
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the authorities' consideration of the petitioner's grievances and the application of case law did not warrant setting aside the chak allotment decisions.
Headnote:
Consolidation of Holdings Act - Dispute over chak allotment - Act Section List: U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 - The court discussed the provisions of Section 21(3) of the Act, Rule 26(5) of U.P.C.H. Rules, 1954, Section 9-B(2) of the Act, and Section 44-A of the Act. The court also referred to case law including Ramdeo Vs. D.D.C. and others, 1980 AWC 593 and Writ-B No. 26086 of 2011 Thamman Singh Vs. State of U.P. and others. The interpretation of these provisions and case law influenced the court's decision in reaching its judgment.
Fact of the Case:
The dispute arose over the allotment of chak on specific plots in a village. The petitioner claimed for allotment of his chak on plot 469 in the northern side, while the respondent was allotted chak in the extreme north on both plots 469 and 576. The petitioner filed a writ petition against the orders of Settlement Officer Consolidation and Deputy Director of Consolidation.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's grievances regarding chak allotment were considered by the authorities, and there was no illegality in their decisions. The court also held that the arguments based on case law did not have a binding precedent and dismissed the writ petition.
Issues: The issues involved the petitioner's grievances regarding chak allotment, the legality of the authorities' decisions, and the application of case law in the judgment.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the finding that the authorities had considered the petitioner's grievances and that the arguments based on case law did not have a binding precedent.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed by the court.
Ram Surat Ram (Maurya), J.
Heard Sri Suresh Kumar Srivastava, for the petitioner, and Sri R.N. Singh Yadav, for the contesting respondent-3. The writ petition has been filed against the orders of Settlement Officer Consolidation 08.08.2013 and 05.07.2014 and Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 03.11.2014 passed in chak allotment proceeding under U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).
2. The dispute between the parties is for allotment of chak on plot 469 in its northern side taking an area of 0.060 hectare of plot 483 and second chak on plot 576 in its northern side of village Barlai, tahsil and district Mau. Om Prakash (Chak-53) (the petitioner) and Ram Janam (Chak-430) (respondent-3) and other respondents are co-sharers in plots 469 and 576. There had been private partition between the parties. It is alleged that on the basis of previous partition, Ram Janam was having his share in northern side and Om Prakash was having his share in south to the portion of Ram Janam. Ram Janam has installed his pumping set in north-east side of plot 469 and also planted trees. During consolidation operation, some portion of plot 469 on which the parties had installed pumping set, was left as achak. Assistant Consolidation Officer proposed two chaks to the petitioner and his other co-sharers on plots 469 and 576 according to their previous possession, in which chak of Ram Janam was in extreme north on plot 469. Om Prakash (the petitioner) filed an objection, claiming for allotment of his chak on plot 469 in northern side taking an area of 0.060 hectare of plot 483. The Consolidation Officer by order dated 12.02.2013 allowed the objection of the petitioner.
3. Ram Janam (respondent-3) filed an appeal (registered as Appeal No. 822 of 2013) from the aforesaid order. The appeal was heard by Settlement Officer Consolidation, who by order dated 08.08.2013 held that shape of the chak of Ram Janam on plot 469 had become in Z form, by order of Consolidation Officer. Ram Janam was having his share in extreme north in plots 469 in private partition and has also installed his pumping set and planted trees as such he was rightly proposed chaks in extreme north in both these plots. The Consolidation Officer has illegally disturbed his chak. On these findings, the appeal was allowed and Ram Janam was allotted his chak in extreme north on both plots 469 and 576. The petitioner filed a time barred revision (registered as Revision No. 338/614/2014-15) from the aforesaid order, on 01.08.2014.
4. It may be mentioned that by the order of Settlement Officer Consolidation dated 08.08.2013, chak of Budhiram (Chak-311) (now represented by respondents-4 and 5) and Raj Kumar (Chak-431) (respondent-6) were also affected. Respondents-4 to 6 filed an application for setting aside the order dated 08.08.2013 on the ground that Budhiram was dead and his heirs were neither substituted in his place nor any notice was issued to them and the order was ex parte against them. Recall application was allowed by order dated 26.06.2014 and thereafter the appeal was again heard on merit by Settlement Officer Consolidation after spot inspection. Settlement Officer Consolidation, by order dated 05.07.2014 held that by the order of Consolidation Officer, shape of the chak of Ram Janam on plot 469 had become in Z form as such his appeal in respect of this chak was liable to be allowed and he was entitled to chak in extreme north on plot 469. While in private partition, major share of Ram Janam was in southern side in plot 576 as such he was liable to be given chak in southern side on plot 576. On these findings the appeal was again allowed by order dated 05.07.2014. By this order chak of the parties are allotted in east-west in rectangular form on both plots 469 and 576. On plot 469, chak of Ram Janam (Chak-430) is in extreme north, thereafter the petitioner has his chak-53, thereafter Jai Govind has his chak-311 and thereafter Raj Kumar
