JUDGMENT

K.N. Misra, J. - This writ petition arises out of orders passed by the consolidation authorities in proceedings relating to allotment of chaks. The petitioner Doodh Nath is Chak holder No. 88. His two sons: Mahabir Prasad and Mahesh Prasad are separate chak holders Nos. 153 and 154 respectively. As against the proposed allotment of chak petitioner Doodh Nath had filed objection asserting that he has got his tube well. He further asserted that the chak which has been allotted to the petitioner at plot Nos. 469 etc. is unfertile and has been valued at a higher exchange ratio. The petitioner had also contended that the chak which has been allotted to him on the other side of the canal cannot be irrigated by the tube well situate on plot No. 591. He therefore, asserted that a chak be allotted to him near his tube well in Sector No. 15 and the chak allotted to him on plot No. 469 be abolished. Tae objection filed by the petitioner was contested by the opposite party No. 4 Ambika Prasad and he asserted that the petitioner's aforesaid two sons have been allotted land in Sector No. 11 and 16 near the said tube well. It was further asserted that the chaks allotted to the parties do not call for any alteration. The aforesaid objection filed by the petitioner was heard and dismissed by the consolidation officer vide order dated 3.3.1978, He has dismissed the objection of the petitioner by a cryptic and nonspeaking order. The prayer of the petitioner for allotting a chak near his tubewell in Sector No. 15 has been rejected by the Consolidation officer apparently on the ground that his two sons have been allotted chaks near the tube well. A perusal of the order of the consolidation officer reveals that he has not correctly mentioned the facts with regard to the extent of holding of the petitioner and his sons in his impugned order while rejecting the objection of the petitioner. Although it is mentioned in his order that the petitioner is a big tenure holder, but the valuation of the land holding of the petitioner and his sons has been mentioned only to be 37.02 annas and as against it, it is mentioned that the objectorpetitioner has been allotted land of the valuation of 41.29 annas. Thus, on these facts, the learned consolidation officer observed that the petitioner has not been prejudiced in allotment of chak.

2. Aggrieved by this order, the petitioner preferred appeal which was heard and dismissed by the Assistant Settlement Officer, Consolidation vide order dated 7.4.1978. In this impugned order the Assistant Settlement Officer, Consolidation had mentioned datas with regard to the extent of the valuation of land of the petitioner and his sons in Sector Nos. 11,15 and 16. According to it the petitioner Doodh Nath and his two sons Mahabir Prasad and Mahesh Prasad held land in their original holding in Sector Nos. 11, 15 and 16 to the extent of 116.45 and as against it they have been allotted separate chaks of the valuation of 123.06 annas. It is not disputed that land in Sector Nos. 11,15 and 16 is near village Abadi. Land of Sector No. 10 is also located by the side of Abadi. Although in Sector No. 15, petitioner Doodh Nath and his two sons had held land of the valuation of 78.65 annas, as per the figures mentioned in the impugned order, but no chak has been allotted to them in Sector No. 15 wherein on plot No. 591/1 petitioner Doodh Nath had his tube well, although the same at the time of local Inspection made by the Assistant Settlement Officer, Consolidation was found to be not in working order as electricity was disconnected. The petitioner in the writ petition has averred that the electricity of the tube well was disconnected on account of nonpayment of electricity bill which occurred due to the fact that quite recently dacoity was committed in his house and his entire belongings were robbed. He was therefore, unable to pay the electricity bills and the disconnection was, thus, made. Learned counsel for the petitioner asser