JUDGMENT

Chandra Kumar Rai, J.

Heard Mr. Shrawan Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Ram Krishna, learned counsel for respondent no.4 and Mr. Ashish Chandra Nishad, learned standing counsel for the state-respondents.

2. Brief facts of the case are that petitioner is chak holder no.92 and original holdings of the petitioner are plot nos. 116M, 117, 31 and 180, total area of 0.2880 hect. Petitioner was proposed two chaks by the Assistant Consolidation Officer, 1st chak on plot no.31M, area 0.125 hect and 2nd chak on plot nos. 116M, 117M, 118M, 119M area 0.203 hectare total, area 0.328 hect. Respondent no.4 is chak holder no.211 and original holding of respondent no.4 is plot no.69, area 0.4820 hect. Respondent no.4 was proposed two chaks, 1st chak on plot no.15M and 51M, total area 0.488 hect and 2nd chak on 179M and 180M, area 0.355 hect. Respondent No.5 is chak holder no. 256 and original holding of respondent no. 5 are plot no. 180 & others. Respondent No. 5 was proposed chak on his original plot no. 180M alongwith other plots. Against the proposal made by the Assistant Consolidation Officer, petitioner filed chak objection before the consolidation officer which