AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Sudhanshu Dhulia, J
In the consolidation proceedings relating to village Aithal Bajurag, Tehsil Laksar, District Haridwar, "chaks" were allotted by the Consolidation Officer vide order dated 06.03.1995. Aggrieved by the "chaks" allotted by the Consolidation Officer regarding the land on which the tenure holders claimed bhumidhari rights on the basis of adverse possession, one Sarup Singh filed an appeal before the Settlement Officer Consolidation on ground that he had claims on the property by way of adverse possession. The appeal was allowed by the Settlement Officer vide order dated 16.08.1999 and the matter was remanded to the Consolidation Officer to decide the matter afresh. The petitioner filed a revision before the Additional Director Consolidation, which was allowed vide order dated 30.10.2002 and the order of the Settlement Officer Consolidation dated 16.08.1999 was set aside and the order of the Consolidation Officer dated 06.03.1995 was affirmed.
Thereafter, the "Gaon Sabha, Aithal Bajurag" filed an appeal before the Settlement Officer Consolidation, which was dismissed vide order dated 4.03.2008 on ground of delay as well as maintainability. Aggrieved, the "Gaon Sabha" filed a revision before the Deputy Director of Consolidation. The Deputy Director of Consolidation vide order dated 29.08.2009 allowed the revision on ground that what was being claimed by the tenure holder was their bhumidhari rights on the basis of adverse possession on the property of Shanti Sharif. It was then contended that Shanti Sharif died intestate without leaving any heirs and therefore the property of Shanti Sharif will devolve on "Gaon Sabha" and hence the "Gaon Sabha" will have the rights on the property, a fact which was never considered either by the Consolidation Officer or the Settlement Officer. Consequently, the Deputy Director of Consolidation remanded the matter to the Consolidation Officer for deciding it afresh on merits.
Aggrieved by the order passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 29.08.2009, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.
Perused the order dated 29.08.2009 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation. The order seems to be fair and calls for no interference by this Court. Let the Consolidation Officer hear the matter and decide it afresh within two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
It is, however, made clear that till the matter is decided by the Consolidation Officer, status quo shall be maintained by the parties.
Writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.
Let a certified copy of this order be issued within twenty-four hours on payment of usual charges.