Shitla Prasad vs Deputy Director of Consolidation

@DELETEUPPERDATA

Ram Surat Ram (Maurya), J.—Heard Sri Anoop Srivastaya, for the petitioner and Sri Vijay Bahadur Verma, for the contesting respondent-4. The writ petition has been filed against the orders of Consolidation Officer dated 27.1.2010, Settlement Officer Consolidation dated 13.4.2010 and Deputy Director of Consolidation, dated 30.11.2010, passed in chak allotment proceeding under U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

The petitioner and respondent-4 are real brothers and co-tenure holders. Plots 111, 571, 587, 633 and 726 of village Saadatganj, pargana Ram Nagar, district Barabanki were their original holdings. Assistant Consolidation Officer proposed first chak to the petitioner on plot 571 (area 0.471 hectare), second chak on plots 637 and 638 (total area 0.086 hectare) and third chak on plots 109/1, 109/2, 110, 111/1 and 112 (total area 0.523 hectare) (total area of three chaks are 1.080 hectare). Assistant Consolidation Officer proposed first chak to respondent-4 on plots 571 and 573 (total area 0.844 hectare) and second chak on plots 637, 638 and 726 (total area 0.353 hectare) (total area of two chaks are 1.197 hectare). The petitioners filed an objection (registered as Case No. 11/09110) under section 20 of the Act for deleting his third chak and allotting its valuation on plots 571 and 726. The Consolidation Officer, by order dated 27.1.2010 deleted second chak of the petitioner and its valuation has been allotted in his first chak on plot 571 and added valuation of plots 637 and 638 in second chak of respondent-4.

The petitioner filed an appeal (registered as Appeal No. 551) and respondent-4 filed an appeal (registered as Appeal No. 548) from the aforesaid order. Both the appeals were consolidated and heard by Settlement Officer Consolidation, who by dated 13.4.2010, found that plots 637 and 638 were at five feet high level from plot 726. Due to order of Consolidation Officer, boring of Jagannath was allotted in the chak of Shitla Prasad. Shitla Prasad was allotted second chak on plots 637 and 638, which are adjacent to his original holdings of plot 726. In case plots 637, 638 and 726 are allotted in the chak of any of the party then uneven land would be allotted to them. On these findings appeal of Shitla Prasad was dismissed and appeal of Jagannath was allowed and order of Consolidation Officer was set aside. The petitioner filed a revision (registered as Revision No. 1124) from aforesaid order, which was dismissed by Deputy Director of Consolidation, by order dated 30.11.2010. Hence this writ petition has been filed.

I have considered the arguments of the Counsel for the parties and examined the record. Due to the orders of consolidation authorities, chaks of the parties of the stage of Assistant Consolidation Officer has been restored. Plot 571 was largest original holdings of the parties of the area of 1.351 hectare. Shitla Prasad was allotted an area of 0471 hectare on plot 571 while Jagannath was allotted an area of 0.844 hectare on plots 571 and 573. Shitla Prasad, from very beginning, demanded for deleting his third chak and allotting its valuation on plots 571 and 726. In case demand of Shitla Prasad is accepted and his third chak on plots 109 etc. is deleted and is allotted in the chak of Jagannath, deleting his second chak on plots 637 etc. and reducing some valuation from first chak then both of them would have been allotted two chaks and valuation of third chak of Shitla Prasad would have been adjusted in his first and second chaks or at least by deleting second chak of Jagannath on plot 637 etc. and reducing some area of his first chak on plot 571, equity between the parties could have been adjusted. There is inequality in the area of chaks of two brothers on their largest original holdings as well as total area allotted to them.

Similarly Jagannath was allotted second chak on plots 637, 638 and 726 (total area 0.353 hectare). By the order of Consolidation Officer, second chak on plots 637 and 638 of Shitla Prasad was abolished and it was allotted to Jagannath. Thus area of second chak of Shitla Prasad was added in second chak of Jagannath. Settlement Officer Consolidation by his order found that plots 637 and 638 were at five feet high level from plot 726. But at the same time he failed to notice that Jagannath was already allotted second chak on plots 637, 638 and 726 (total area 0.353 hectare) and by adding total area of 0.086 hectare of second chak of Shitla Prasad, no material prejudice will be caused to Jagannath as he was satisfied from his second chak and had not filed any objection. In any case, Shitla Prasad was ready to take entire area of the chak of Jagannath at this place.

So far as the ground taken by Settlement Officer Consolidation that due to order of Consolidation Officer, boring of Jagannath was went in the chak of Shitla Prasad, he could have adjusted equities between the parties by allotting chak to Shitla Prasad in other side of plot 571 saving boring of Jagannath in his chak but no effort was made. The consolidation authorities have failed to notice that although Jagannath and Shitla Prasad are real brothers but total area of their chak have varied by 0.117 hectares. There was no sense to allot second chak to Shitla Prasad of an area of 0.086 hectare on plots 637 and 638 that too an uran chak. In the result writ petition succeeds and is allowed. The orders of Consolidation Officer (respondent-3) dated 27.01.2010, Settlement Officer Consolidation (respondent-2) dated 13.04.2010, and Deputy Director of Consolidation (respondent-1) dated 30.11.2010 are set aside. The case is remanded to Deputy Director of Consolidation to decide the revision of the petitioner afresh on merit in accordance of law, within a period of two months after hearing the parties.