- (1.) I. M. Quddusi, J. Heard Shri D. K. Mishra, learned Counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for the State and Shri Santosh Mishra, learned Counsel appearing for opposite party No. 2.
(2.) BY means of this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 1-1-2001 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Pratapgarh and further prayed for remanding the case to Deputy Director of Consolidation with a direction to hear the case after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and also decide the case on merits. The petitioners have challenged the impugned order dated 1-1- 2001 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Pratapgarh cancelling the names of the petitioners from Khata Nos. 20 and 40 of C. H. From 11 and Khata No. 48 of C. H. Form 23 and also to cancel the maliyat value on the basis of a complaint against the petitioners by opposite party No. 2. On the complaint made by opposite party No. 2, a report was summoned by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Pratapgarh, who passed an order without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioners because the petitioners legally declared 'sah-Khatedar' of Khata Nos. 20 and 40 of C. H. Form 11 and Khata No. 48 of C. H. Form 23, Mauga Paloopur, Pargana and Tahsil Patti, District Pratapgarh. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Pratapgarh has made manifest error of law while passing the impugned order.
(3.) CONSIDERING the facts and circumstances of the case, I think that the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Pratapgarh should be directed to hear the matter afresh and decide the same after providing opportunity of hearing to the parties as it is well-settled proposition of law that no person should be condemned unheard. Therefore, this writ petition is allowed in part. The orders dated 1-1-2001 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Pratapgarh is quashed. The matter is remanded to the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Pratapgarh for fresh decision after providing an opportunity of hearing to the parties. The parties shall appear before the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Pratapgarh on 14th March, 2002. It is, however, clarified that in case the possession of the land in dispute has already been taken from the petitioners, their possession would depend upon the decision of the case by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Pratapgarh but in case they are in possession, there is no question to dispossess the petitioners from the land in dispute till any order is passed by Deputy Director of Consolidation, Pratapgarh. Petition partly allowed. .;