- (1.) The Petitioner aggrieved by the order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation and the Settlement Officer Consolidation dated 16.12.2010 and 20.8.2009 respectively has come up before this Court praying for quashing of the said orders and for maintaining the allotment to the Petitioner over Plot No. 566/1 relating to Village Madhwapur Kalan, Tehsil Etwa, District Siddharth Nagar.
(2.) The facts giving rise to this controversy are that Plot No. 566/1 is the recorded original holding of the Respondent No. 3 which is stated to have an area of about 12 ares. Out of the said area the Petitioner contends that he constructed a house with the consent of the Respondent No. 3 over approximately 4 ares. The consolidation operations intervened and the plot was valued at 30 paise, against which it is stated that no objections were filed by the Respondent No. 3. The objections are required to be filed under Section 9 of the Act, and in the event no such objection is filed, then no claim in relation to valuation, etc. can be set up in view of the bar contained in Section 11A of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner Sri IS. Shukla relying on the judgment in the case of Surya Bali v. Dy. Director of Consolidation and Ors.,2006 100 RevDec 471, contends that no alteration can be made at the stage of chak disputes or the revisional stage if the tenure-holder has failed to file any objections.
(3.) As a result of the valuation of the plot, there was an exchange of holdings under the scheme. The balance area of Plot No. 566/1, apart from the constructed area, came to be allotted in the chak of the Petitioner. The allotment proceedings are followed by objections and the Respondent No. 3 appears to have filed an objection under Section 20 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 which was rejected by the Consolidation Officer on 18th February, 2009. Aggrieved, the Respondent No. 3 filed an appeal.;