R.H. Zaidi, J. - (1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties and also perused the record.
(2.) By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioners pray for issuance of a writ, order of direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 23.8.1991 passed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation and the order dated 11.12.1991 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation in the proceedings under section 20 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, for short, 'the Act against the petitioners.
(3.) From the material on the record it appears that the Assistant Consolidation Officer proposed Chak No. 201 to petitioner No. 1 and Chak No. 116 to petitioner No. 2. Chak No. 201 consisted of plot No. 205, which was original plot of respondents No. 3 to 5. Respondents No. 3 to 5 filed objection claiming that they should be allotted one chak instead of two chaks and also a chak road upto their chaks. On the objection filed by the respondents No. 3 to 5 the Consolidation Officer made spot inspection. He has also heard the parties who were likely to be affected by the order passed by him and thereafter passed the order dated 1.1.1991 whereby chak Nos. 167, 147, 87, 201, 116, 149-Ka, 140-Kha, 149-sa, 179, 149-a and 149-ba were affected, which were shown in the schedule appended to the order. The said order was also made applicable in the case No. 206, a copy of which has not been filed alongwith the writ petition. Challenging the validity of the order passed by the Consolidation Officer the respondents No. 3 to 5 filed an appeal before the Settlement Officer Consolidation. They have claimed that plot No. 205 was their original plot and was situated adjacent to the road. The said plot was, therefore, liable to be allotted to them under the law. The appeal filed by the respondents No. 3 to 5 was objected to and opposed by the petitioners. However, the Settlement Officer Consolidation after hearing the parties and after perusing the material on the record allowed the appeal by his judgment and order dated 23.8.1991. At this stage it may be noted that Annexure No. 4, copy of the order passed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation is not a correct copy of the order inasmuch as at page 26 it has wrongly been typed that plot No. 205 is not the original plot of respondents No. 3 to 5 when the fact is otherwise. According to the order passed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation chaks of the parties were modified as shown in the schedule appended to the said order. Aggrieved by this judgment and order passed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation three revisions were filed before the Deputy Director of Consolidation, which were consolidated, The said revisions were heard together and were ultimately dismissed by a common order passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 11.12.1991. Hence the present petition.;