Sabhajeet Yadav, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Krishan Ji Khare, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri R.K. Tiwari for respondent no.2.
(2.) By this petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 25.2.2010 passed by Dy. Director of Consolidation, Chitrakoot in Revision No. 14 of 2009-10, Ramanand v. Babu Lal & others under Section 48 of U.P.C.H. Act.
(3.) The main submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that vide impugned order dated 25.2.2010 passed by Deputy Director of Consolidation the petitioner has been given three Chaks though he is small farmer of the village having original holding of about two Bighas. It is contended that prior to Deputy Director of Consolidation stage he was allotted only two chaks upon his original holdings. His one chak which was at plot nos. 583, 584,585, 586, 589 and 590 comprising of an area of .283 aire has been split of in two chaks. Out of which an area of 212 aire has been given to respondent no. 2 by leaving only 071 aire area at the aforesaid place with the petitioner and remaining chak has been given to the petitioner at plot nos. 615, 616, 617, 618, 619 and 782 almost as Uran chak, out of aforesaid plots only in plot no. 617 an area of .105 aire belongs to the petitioner and in aforesaid plot also he has only 1/120 share, as such the allotment of chak of petitioner upon the aforesaid plots comprising of an area of .250 aire of 16.92 valuation appears to be wholly arbitrary. Not only this, butas a small farmer of the village the petitioner has been given three chaks by the order of Dy. Director of Consolidation, though the Assistant Consolidation Officer and Settlement Officer of Consolidation have maintained only two chaks of the petitioner; first was given at plot no. 930 and 962 and second chak was given at plot nos. 589,590,583,584,585 and 586 comprising of an area of .283 aire of 22.67 valuation.;