AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Sudhir Narain, J.—The dispute relates to the allotment of chalk.
2, I have heard learned Counsel for the parties.
The Deputy Director of Consolidation by the impugned order dated 2511996 allowed the revision of the contesting opposite parties and made necessary alterations adjustments in the chaks of the parties. In the order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation has taken the view that chakholder No. 77 is original tenure holder of plot Nos. 52/2, 52/3 and 54/2 and accordingly made alterations in the chaks of the parties.
The version of the petitioner is that respondent No, 1 wrongly observed in his order that chak holder No. 77 is original tenure holder of Plot No. 52 or any portion of it. In paragraph 15 specific averment has been made that respondents 3 and 4 are not original tenure holders of Plot No. 52 or any subplots of it. He has also filed form C.H. Form 2 in proof of this assertion wherein plot Nos. 52/2 and 52/3 have been recorded in the name of Moti Chand, Ramsurat, Chapetu and Jhanjhu. On behalf of the respondents a counteraffidavit has been filed by Deo Narain. In paragraph 16 the averments made in the counteraffidavit are denied but the respondents have not filed any documentary evidence in support of their allegation that the respondents are tenure holders of plot No. 52 or any portion of it.
As the basis of the order passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation is that the respondents are the tenure holders of plot No. 52 and no evidence has been adduced to show as to how the respondents are tenureholders of plot No. 52, the writ petition is hereby allowed and the impugned order dated 2511996 is quashed. The Deputy Director of Consolidation, Ghazipur is directed to decide the case afresh in accordance with law within three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order before him. Petition allowed.