S.K. Singh, J. - (1.) List has been revised. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has been heard. Challenge in this petition is the judgment of the Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 10.9.1993 and that of the Settlement Officer, Consolidation dated 23.7.1993 (Annexures 6 and 3) respectively. Proceedings are under section 20 of UPCH Act which relates to adjustment of chak. The petitioner is the chak holder No. 64 which was allotted to him at the stage of Assistant Consolidation Officer. Against the proposed allotment, petitioner filed objection claiming inclusion of plot No. 36/3 which was allowed by Consolidation Officer by his judgment dated 13.5.1993, against which opposite party filed appeal, which was allowed on 23.7.1993.
(2.) The petitioner filed revision before the Deputy Director of Consolidation but the same has been dismissed by judgment dated 10.9.1993. Thus, against the judgment of Deputy Director of Consolidation and the Settlement Officer, Consolidation, petitioner is before this Court.
(3.) Submission of learned Counsel for the petitioner is that plot No. 36/3 is the original holding of petitioner in which large numbers of trees are in existence and therefore, on the objection of petitioner, that plot was allotted to him by the Consolidation Offices but the Settlement Officer, Consolidation and the Deputy Director of Consolidation without considering the aforesaid aspects has disturbed the petitioner. Submission is that Deputy Director of Consolidation has called formal report of Consolidator in respect to spot situation upon which, the Consolidator submitted his report on 9.9.1993 (Annexure 5) to the writ petition in which it has been clearly stated that there are 57 Musham, two Guava and one Kathal tree which are in existence over the land in dispute. The judgment of Deputy Director of Consolidation, on perusal clearly speaks that he has not taken ino account the report of Consolidator. In fact, no reason has been assigned for taking away plot No. 36/3 which was allotted in his chak by the Consolidation Officer which is claimed to be petitioner's original holding.;