IMPORTANT POINT
Consolidation Authorities cannot amend the chak of a tenure holder that has attained finality before the completion of the consolidation operation, except as provided under specific sections of the UPCH Act.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel for the State respondents, learned counsel for the private respondent no.5 and perused the record.

2. In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, and order proposed to be passed hereinunder, this Court proceeds to decide the present matter finally at admission stage itself without calling for the respective affidavits of the parties, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties present.

3. Petitioner is aggrieved with the reference order dated 29.9.2023 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation (in brevity 'DDC') in Case No.0170 of 2023 under Section 48 (3) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (in brevity 'UPCH Act'), by which chak no.273 belongs to the petitioner has been disturbed.

4. Facts culled out from the record are that in provisional Consolidation Scheme present petitioner had been proposed chak No. 273, however, respondent No. 5 had been proposed chak No.80. At the time of preparation of final consolidation record, owing to some discrepancy, area having valuation of Rs.178.51 paisa has been left to be recorded in the chak of the respondent no.5. Meaning thereby area having valuation of Rs.178.51 paisa was short in his chak. Having aggrieved with the lesser valuation of Rs.178.51 paisa in his chak, respondent no.5 has moved miscellaneous application to complete the aforesaid valuation in his chak. After chequered history of litigation between the parties upto the Hon'ble High Court, finally Settlement Officer of Consolidation (in brevity 'SOC') has referred the matter, vide order dated 30.8.2023, before DDC to allow the reference, which has been approved/accepted by DDC vide its order impugned dated 29.9.2023. Consequent to the reference order passed by DDC, chak of the petitioner has been affected to the extent of the valuation of Rs.96.11 paisa which has been shifted/allocated in the chak of the respondent no.5. Having been aggrieved with the aforesaid change in his chak, the instant petition has been filed by the petitioner.

5. Assailing the order passed by DDC, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted two-fold submissions; first, regarding maintainability of the application moved by the contesting respondent no.5 under Section 42 A of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (in brevity 'UPCH Act'), that too, after after de-notification under Section 52 of UPCH Act and second submission has been advanced with respect to the jurisdiction of the consolidation courts to make any modification in the chak of the petitioner, while exercising their power in reference proceedings. It is submitted that the Consolidation Authorities have got no jurisdiction to amend the chak of any tenure holder which has attained finality before completion of the consolidation operation, thus, the instant writ petition may be allowed and the order impugned passed by DDC, being illegal, unwarranted under the law and cryptic, be quashed.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent no.5 has contended that respondent no.5 has, in fact, moved misc. application to correct the area of his chak which is short in the final consolidation record, therefore, same can not be treated to be filed under Section 42 A of UPCH Act. It is next contended that while passing the reference order, the DDC has considered the version of the present petitioner as well and, accordingly, shifted the chak of the petitioner on the partial area of plot no.286/1 Mi which was initially his original holding. It is further contended that, in fact, no grievance caused to the petitioner who has been compensated with the equal valuation of the area which has been taken out from his chak. It is next contended that grievance of the petitioner is imaginary, therefore, instant writ petition may be dismissed being misconceived and devoid of merits.

7. Learned standing counsel, on the basis of the instructions dated 02.01.2024 duly signed by the SOC,