- (1.) HEARD Sri A.P. Tiwari, for the petitioner and Sri Anupam Kumar, holding brief of Sri Shobhit Saxena, for respondent -2.
(2.) THE writ petition has been filed against the order of Deputy Director of Consolidation (respondent -1) dated 04.10.2013, passed in the revision arising out of chak allotment proceeding under U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).
(3.) RADHEY Shyam (father of the petitioner) (chak holder 631) and Ghan Shyam (father of respondents -2 and 3) (chak holder 175) Ganga Shyam (chak holder 169) were real brothers and had 1/3 share each in their original holdings. Assistant Consolidation Officer proposed three chaks to Radhey Shyam. First chak was proposed on original plots 186 etc of an area of 1.5000 hectare, second chak was proposed on plots 477 etc. of an area of 1.008 hectare and third chak was proposed on plots 1019 etc. of an area of 1.981 hectare. Radhey Shyam did not file any objection against his proposed chak. Ghan Shyam filed an objection (registered as Case No. 215) under Section 20 of the Act, and demanded a chak on plot 186. Ganga Shyam also filed an objection (registered as Case No. 309) under Section 20 of the Act and demanded a chak on plot 186. The Consolidation Officer consolidated these objections along with other chak objections of the village and by order dated 15.05.2012 dismissed the objections of Ghan Shyam and Ganga Shyam. However, small change in second and third chak of Radhey Shyam was made by him. Ganga Shyam filed an appeal (registered as Appeal No. 46/181) and Sanjeev Kumar Saxena (respondent -3) filed an appeal (registered as Appeal No. 48/183) from the aforesaid order. These appeals were consolidated with the appeal of Basant Ram and decided by Settlement Officer Consolidation, who by order dated 22.10.2012 held that as chak of Radhey Shyam on plot no. 186 has already been affected by order dated 29.09.2012, from his Court as such demand of Ganga Shyam and Sanjeev Kumar Saxena for allotment of their chaks on plot 186 cannot be accepted. However, appeal of Sanjeev Kumar Saxena was partly allowed. It may be mentioned that Settlement Officer Consolidation, by order dated 29.09.2012, made small change in third chak of the petitioner and not in first chak.;