- (1.) HEARD Sri Rama Shanker Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Brajesh Shukla, who has filed appearance on behalf of respondent nos. 3 and 4, and Sri Arun Kumar Srivastava, who has accepted notice on behalf of responent no. 2.
(2.) THIS writ petition arises out of the proceedings for allotment of chaks and the dispute therein pertains to plot no. 277. Land of this plot was reserved for playground in the statement of principles. It appears that at the instance of the petitioner and on the oral consent of the erstwhile Gram Pradhan this land, which was reserved for public purpose, has been valued and included in the chak of the petitioner. Against this allotment a revision was filed, which was allowed vide order dated 25.8.2014 and hence this writ petition.
(3.) THE primary contention raised by the petitioner is that the contesting respondents, who had preferred the revision, had no concern with the plot in dispute. They were not the original tenure holders of plot no. 277. The revision was also not maintainable because the order against which the revision was filed did not affect their chaks. It is submitted that the revision at the instance of the revisionists was not maintainable and should not have been entertained and thus the impugned order is liable to be set aside on this short ground alone. Sri Brajesh Shukla on the other hand supported the impugned order.;