Sabhajeet Yadav, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners is permitted to implead Sri Ram Nath as respondent no.5 and Village Consolidation Committee through Gram Pradhan as respondent no.6.
(3.) The submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that there exist manure pits in the plot no.92 and 94 and common pathway for ingress and egress of petitioners and other villagers but the aforesaid pathway and manure pits have been allotted in the chak of the respondent no.5, as a consequence of which their ingress and egress has been blocked. It is also stated that through the aforesaid plots there was a Nali for passing the rainy water of the village. But on account of allotment of aforesaid plot in the chak of respondent no.5 the petitioners and other villagers would face water logging. The chak road given by the consolidation authorities would not sufficiently meet the requirement of the petitioners, as the petitioners would not be able to flow their rainy water through the aforesaid chak road but the Consolidation Officer and Deputy Director of Consolidation have failed to consider this aspect of the matter, merely for the reason that the Village Consolidation Committee did not submit proper proposal before the consolidation authorities. As such the matter requires serious consideration by this Court.;