- (1.) Heard Sri Nalin Kumar Sharma, counsel for the petitioners and Sri Santosh Kumar Srivastava, counsel for the respondents.
(2.) The writ petition has been filed for quashing the order of Deputy Director of Consolidation (respondent-1) dated 12.07.2013 by which the stay application moved by the petitioners in the revision, arising out of title proceeding under U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), has been rejected.
(3.) In the present case, the dispute relates to the property of Radha son of Chuhad. Smt. Prem Lata and Smt. Sewati (respondents-2 and 3) and Smt. Kasturi (transferor of the petitioners) are daughters of Radha, who died in 1975. Smt. Prem Lata got her name mutated in place of Radha on 11.09.1975. Later on, the village was placed in consolidation operation and notified under Section 9 on 21.01.1985 and under Section 20 on 21.04.1986 of the Act. The chak was carved in the name of Smt. Prem Lata (respondent-2). Smt. Kasturi filed an objection under Section 9-A of the Act on 12.12.1997, claiming her 1/3 share in the land in dispute, which was allowed on 26.04.1998. This order was recalled by the Consolidation Officer on 08.12.2003. However in the meantime Smt. Kasturi executed a sale deed dated 08.08.2003 in favour of the petitioners. The Consolidation Officer again by order dated 14.05.2012 allowed the objection of Smt. Kasturi. This order was set aside by the Settlement Officer Consolidation by order dated 08.07.2013. The petitioners filed a revision against the aforesaid order on the same day, i.e. 08.07.2013. In the revision an application for staying the operation of the order of Settlement Officer Consolidation dated 08.07.2013 has been moved on which the contesting respondent who had also put appearance before Deputy Director of Consolidation was granted time for filing the objection and 12.07.2013 was fixed and till then the parties were directed to maintain status quo. Deputy Director of Consolidation heard the stay application on 12.07.2013, and held that as the case was highly contested and the respondents have put appearance and lower court records have been received as such in stead of hearing the arguments on stay application, it would be appropriate to hear the revision finally. On these findings, by order dated 12.07.2013 stay application was rejected and 15.07.2013 has been fixed for final arguments in the revision. The writ petition has been filed against the order dated 12.07.2013.;