Ram Sewak and Ors. vs Deputy Director of Consolidation,Jaunpur & Ors.

Janardan Sahai, J.—It appears that on the basis of the order of the Consolidation Officer dated 1652001 reference was submitted by the Consolidation Officer on 432004. Objections were filed and the Consolidation Officer submitted a report that Ram Sewak and others the petitioners chak holder No. 399 has been given an area of 17.83% more than their original. The reference so submitted before the Deputy Director of Consolidation was accepted by his one line order �Yatha Prastav Anumodit� dated 21 62004.

The grievance of the Petitioners is that this order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation was passed without hearing them and it is a nonspeaking order. According to the petitioners their valuable chak out land plot No. 303 has also been taken out. In paragraph 3 of the writ petition the petitioners have averred that the order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation was passed without notice and opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. The averments of paragraph 3 have been denied in the counteraffidavit. No doubt the petitioners did file objections against the reference prepared by the Assistant Consolidation Officer but it does not appear that the petitioners were heard by the Deputy Director of Consolidation. There is no recital in the order that the Deputy Director has heard the petitioners or that the petitioners did not turn up despite notice. Moreover, the order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation is a single line order, which has been quoted above. Such a nonspeaking order shows nonapplication of mind and cannot be sustained. The view finds support from Zakaullah v. Deputy Director of Consolidation, 1993 RD 2.

The writ petition is, therefore, allowed. The order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 2162004 is set aside. The Deputy Director of Consolidation shall pass fresh order after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties.