- (1.) HEARD Sri G.P. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Mohan Yadav, learned counsel for the respondent no. 5.
(2.) THE village was de-notified on 9th April, 1988 under Section 52 (1) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953. After about 17 years, respondent nos. 4 to 6 moved an application on 3rd August, 2005 to the District Magistrate, Allahabad purported to be under Section 42-A read with Section 48(3) of the Act for correcting the records in terms of the order dated 07.09.1973 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation in Revision No. 662 /822. THE correction sought was that the old plot no. 86-M area 2 biswa and 10 biswansi and old plot no. 80M area 11 biswansi of village Ramnathi have been allotted in a Chak-road which order is endorsed on CH Form-23 but the same was not erroneously incorporated in CH Form- 41 and 45 and as such this error should be rectified. A report was called for on the said application on 4th August, 2005 which was submitted on 22.11.2005. On the strength of this report an ex parte order without putting the petitioners to notice was passed on 28.11.2005 by a three word cryptic order, 'approved as proposed'. The petitioners filed a restoration application along with a delay condonation application and the same was entertained. The grievance of the petitioner was that a large area of 4 biswas and 19 biswansi was sought to be reduced from the recorded area of the petitioners as contained under CH Form- 41 and 45. The Deputy Director Consolidation while proceeding to consider the restoration application called for a fresh report on 30th January, 2010 to which the petitioners had filed an objection. Without deciding the said objection the restoration was dismissed on 8th December, 2011 recording findings about the existence of the order dated 07.09.1973 and implementation thereof for the reason that it related to a public utility Chak-road. Sri G.P. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the proceedings are without jurisdiction in view of the law laid down by this Court as reported in 2011 (113) RD 703, 2003 (94) RD 90, 1989 RD 281 (DB) and 1989 RD 201 , the submission is that an application under Section 42-A read with 48(3) of the 1953 Act was not maintainable. The matter was heard at length with the assistance of Sri Mohan Yadav, learned counsel for the respondent no. 5 and learned Standing counsel and learned counsel for the Gaon Sabha Sri D.D. Chauhan on 28.02.2012, on which date CH Form- 23 was directed to brought on record. The supplementary affidavit was filed bringing on record CH Form 23.
(3.) ON 01.03.2012, the matter was again heard and following order was passed. "After the matter was heard at length Sri G.P. Singh on instructions from his client submits that even presuming the order of 1973 to be valid the chak road as proposed under the said order can be carved out provided the same does not bring about any reduction in the bandobasti area of the petitioner. Let an affidavit to that effect be filed tomorrow before the Court. Put up tomorrow. " Sri Singh has filed a second supplementary affidavit entailing his arguments and in response to the aforesaid order, he has incorporated paragraph- 2(8) to the following affect: "2(8) That even presuming this order of 1973 to be valid the chak road as proposed under the said order can be carved out provided the same does not bring about any reduction in bandobasti area of the petitioner's p lots as mentioned in C.H. Form 41 and 45 and also in the extract of Khatauni Annexed as Annexure- SA-2 of 1st supplementary affidavit.." ;