Court No. - 36

Case :- WRIT - B No. - 2765 of 2018

Petitioner :- Vishnu Kant Pathak And 12 Others

Respondent :- Deputy Director Of Consolidation And 8 Others

Counsel for Petitioner :- Shri Prakash Dwivedi

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

By means of the present writ petition, the order dated 6.12.2014

passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, District Mirzapur in

Revision No. 491 (Vishvanath deceased Varisan Satya Narayan

and others vs. Ram Nihor (Deceased) varisan Lal Prasad and

another) under Section 48 (3) of the Consolidation of Holdings Act

and the orders dated 18.3.2015 and 13.11.2017 in review

application filed by the petitioners are under challenge.

The ground of challenge to the order dated 6.12.2014 of making

reference is that the valuation of plot nos. 172/1 and 172/2 was duly

fixed during the course of consolidation and the co-tenure holders

were satisfied with the arrangements made by the Assistant

Consolidation Officer affirmed by the Consolidation Officer. After the

scheme was finalised, it was not open for them to raise a dispute

regarding share in plot no. 172/2 area 0-4-0, a groove land which

has been kept out of consolidation.

The petitioner has filed a review application for recall of the order

dated 6.12.2014 on the ground that some of the opposite parties in

the revision were dead at the relevant point of time. No notice was

issued to their heirs. The said application has been rejected vide

order dated 13.11.2017 with the specific finding that the Deputy

Director of Consolidation vide order dated 6.12.2014 made a

reference to the Settlement Officer Consolidation giving direction to

him to decide the same after giving notice and due opportunity to all

concerned. No order on the merits of the claim of any of the parties

has been passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation and as

such there was no requirement of any interference.

Another order dated 18.3.2015 passed by the Settlement Officer

Consolidation on the reference made by the Deputy Director of

Consolidation is under challenge on the ground that the Settlement

Officer Consolidation has virtually accepted the claim of the

opposite parties.

This submission of learned counsel for the petitioners to challenge

the order dated 18.3.2015 is baseless inasmuch as the Deputy

Director of Consolidation by means of the aforesaid order has

simply invited report of the Consolidation Officer. As to the merits of

the reference, the same is still pending consideration.

In a matter under Section 48(3) of the Act, all the interested parties

have a right to receive notice and file their objections.

It is open for the petitioners to file their objections in the pending

reference before the Settlement Officer Consolidation.

The applications moved by the petitioner before the Deputy Director

of Consolidation for review of the order dated 6.12.2014 and the

challenge made to the order dated 18.3.2015 are based on

misconceived notion.

There is no merit in the submission of learned counsel for the

petitioners.

The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

It goes without saying that the reference has to be answered by the

Settlement Officer Consolidation considering the objections of all

the parties and having perused the record regarding actual position

of plot nos. 171/1 and 172/2.

Any observation made herein above would not come in the way of

the parties in the pending proceeding.

Order Date :- 6.2.2018

Brijesh