JUDGMENT

A.P. Mishra, J. - This Petition has been preferred against orders dated 14th November, 1980, and 17th July, 1980 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation and the Settlement Officer (Consolidation) respectively.

2. The Petitioner is a chak-holder No. 152 situate in village Mardahi, hamlet of village Jankheri, Pargana Gangoh, tehsil Nakur, district Saharanpur. During the preparation of the provisional consolidation scheme as per Petitioner's case no chak road was proposed under Section 19-A of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on Plots Nos. 264 and 237-M lying adjacent to the chak No. 148. Chaks Nos. 148 and 147 are adjacent to the Petitioner's aforesaid chak. Subsequently, after the carvation of the allotment of chaks the chak road running by the southern end of chak No. 147 was proposed to be extended further over plots Nos. 264 and 237-M. Against this, the petitioner tiled an objection. He contended that on this chak be has already got installed a tube-well on the said plots and thus no chak road should be carved out through or on the said land.

3. The Consolidation Officer on 12th July, 1972, allowed the objection of the Petitioner. Then on 7th September, 1979, respondents Nos. 4 to 8 filed an objection before the Consolidation Officer for quashing of the aforesaid order dated 12th July, 1972. The Petitioner's contention was that this objection should not have been entertained as the village itself is denotified under Section 52 (2) of the Act on the 25th December, 1976. The Consolidation Officer rejected the objection of the respondents by means of an order dated 9th April, 1980, on the ground that this is not maintainable on account of the aforesaid de-notification. Aggrieved as against that the contesting respondents filed an appeal to the Settlement Officer (Consolidation). This objection was dismissed but while dismissing the appeal he made a reference to the Deputy Director of Consolidation under Section 48 (3) with a recommendation to set aside the order of the Consolidation Officer. Apart from the said reference the contesting respondents also flied a revision under Section 48 of the Act. This revision and the aforesaid reference were connected by the revising authority. Finally, on the 14th November, 1980, the revising authority allowed the revision and set aside the order dated 12th July, 1972, passed by the Consolidation Officer. Aggrieved as against the aforesaid two orders the Petitioner has tiled the Present Petition challenging the same to be illegal.

4. According to the Petitioner, the consolidation authorities had no jurisdiction to reopen the matter, which finally concluded, on two grounds, firstly, after issuance of notification under Section 52 (2) of the Act, and, secondly, the application filed by the contesting respondents before the consolidation authorities was without an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. Thus, the authorities had no jurisdiction to decide the same. The Petitioner's contention, on merit, has been that the Consolidation Officer rightly passed the order dated 12th July, 1972, as it was brought to his notice that over the chak which has been allotted to the Petitioner, the Petitioner after having got possession had invested a huge money including the construction of a tube-well, and thus carving of chak road on the said plot would adversely affect the Petitioner.

5. The contesting respondents denied the aforesaid submission both on law and on facts. According to them, even prior to the start of consolidation proceedings during 1965 in the said village there was a permanent Rasta shown by letters AVCDEFG in the attached consolidation map which was used by the villagers for reaching to their respective cultivatory plots. This Rasta was marked as chak road of the said village during Consolidation proceedings in 1968 also and was shown as such in the consolidation map prepared in respect of that village during 1379-F.