- (1.) HEARD Sri S.C. Tripathi for the petitioners, Sri Mansih Deo Singh, for the respondents.
(2.) THE writ petition has been filed for quashing the order of Deputy Director of Consolidation, Jaunpur (respondent -1) dated 21.09.1999, passed in Revision No. 6297, Ram Lakhan Vs. Khirodhan and others, arising out of the chak allotment proceedings under U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). During consolidation, Khirodhan (now represented by the petitioners) was allotted Chak -52, Ram Jeet and others (the petitioners) were allotted Chak -97, Ram Lakhan (respondent -2) was allotted chak -304, Sita Ram (father of respondent -3) was allotted Chak -391. The dispute relates to the allotment of plot No. 133/622, which was Gaon Sabha land. The petitioners claim that plot No. 133/622 is lying in front of their house and from a long before the consolidation, they were using this plot as their appurtenant and occupied by keeping their nad, charan and tying cattle over it and plot No. 136 was their original holding, as such they are claiming for allotment of this plot in their chak. On the other hand, plot No. 133 was the original holding of Ram Lakhan (respondent -2) who also claims for allotment of plot No. 133/622 in his chak on the allegations that he had occupied plot No. 133/622 by keeping his nad, charan, madaha and also installed a hand pump and diesel pumping set over it. Plot No. 133 was his largest original holdings and in this vicinity, he has his maximum original holdings. It may be mentioned that Assistant Consolidation Officer valued plot No. 133/622 and allotted in the chak of Ram Lakhan (respondent -2), chak holder 304.
(3.) THE petitioners, chak holder 97, filed an objection under Section 20 of the Act, against their proposed chak claiming that a part of land lying in front of their house, over which their hand pump and bhatta was situate be reserved for extension of their abadi and by taking area of plot No. 133, 133/622, 134, 136 and 185, a rectangular chak be allotted in his chak, by abolishing their proposed chak on plot Nos. 174, 174/661. The objection of the petitioners was dismissed by the Consolidation Officer.;