Section 42-A of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 has overriding effect and allows for the correction of clerical or arithmetical errors in the final consolidation record.

Ram Surat Ram (Maurya), J. –

Heard Sri K.P. Tiwri for the petitioner and Sri Sudhanshu Pandey holding brief of Sri Sandeep Kumar Mishra for the caveator.

The writ petition has been filed against the order of Consolidation Officer dated 15.2.2014 and 15.5.2015 by which the application under Section 42-A of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") for correction of map has been allowed and the recall application of the petitioner has been dismissed and the order of Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 24.6.2016 dismissing the revision of the petitioner against the aforesaid orders.

2. Pradeep, respondent-4, filed an application for correction of map in respect of plot no.442 in which according to him there was an old well but it has not been shown and in respect of plot no.477, which was the chak road but it was not correctly shown in final consolidation map. On this application a report has been called for from the subordinate authorities by the Consolidation Officer. Assistant Consolidation Officer submitted his report dated 20.12.2013. In the report he has mentioned that in CH Form 2-A, there was an old well in plot nos. 1238/1, which was allotted new number 442 but well was not shown in plot no.442. So far as the chak road on plot no.477 is concerned he has mentioned that chak road of plot no.477, area 0.04 acre was carved out from old plot no.1319 area 0.021 acre, 1321, area 0.01 acre and 1322, area 0.01 acre, total area 0.04 acre. Thus in confirmed chak map, this chak road was running through new plot no.475 and 476 and running upto new plot no.440 but in final consolidation map this chak road was not correctly shown. The matter was heard by the Consolidation Officer, who by order dated 5.9.2014 has accepted the report of the Assistant Consolidation Officer dated 20.12.2013 and directed for correction of chak map. The petitioner filed an application for recall of the aforesaid order on the ground that although new chak road was carved out through his plot no.475 and plot no.476 but he was not given any opportunity of hearing. Thus the order be recalled. The recall application was heard by the Consolidation Officer, who by order dated 15.5.2015 found that the order relating to correction of map was passed after perusal of the record and does not suffer from any illegality and the order is not required to be recalled. The petitioner challenged the aforesaid order in Revision No.15/40 of 2015. The revision was heard by Deputy Director of Consolidation, who by order dated 24.6.2016 dismissed the revision. Hence, this writ petition has been filed.

3. The counsel for the petitioner submits that although order of Consolidation Officer dated 15.2.2015 was an ex parte order but the recall application of the petitioner was illegally rejected. The notification under Section 52 of the Act took place more than twenty years ago of the filing of the application under Section 42-A of the Act as such the application under Section 42-A of the Act was not maintainable but it has been illegally allowed by the Consolidation Officer. In the application the respondent no.4 has relied upon CH form 2-A but while passing the order his CH Form 2-A was not considered rather the order was passed on other facts. The impugned orders do not assign any reason as such they are arbitrary and liable to be set aside.

4. I have considered the arguments of the counsel for the petitioner.

5. So far as the notification under Section 52 of the Act is concerned, Section 42-A of the Act provides as follows:

"42-A. Correction of clerical or arithmetical errors.- Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force, if the Consolidation Officer or the Settlement Officer, Consolidation, is satisfied that a clerical or arithmetical error apparent on the face of the record exists in any document prepared under any provision of this Act, he shall, either on his own motion or on the application of any person