- (1.) Present petition is directed against the judgment and orders dated 12-3-1992 and 20-11-1992 passed by Settlement Officer, Consolidation Ghazipur and Dy. Director of Consolidation Ghazipur respectively, the genesis of which is owed to the proceedings for allotment of Chak under Section 20 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (in short the 'Act'). It would transpire that the respondent No. 4- Rishikesh was not provided with the facility of a Chak road to facilitate his access to his chak and accordingly, on publication of statement of proposal, he filed objection under Section 20 of the Act staking demand to the facility of a Chak road and upon the objection, being rejected by the Consolidation Officer, the respondent No. 4 preferred, an appeal before the Settlement Officer, Consolidation under Section 21 of the Act reiterating his demand which has been summed in the appellate order in the following words :- "Appealkarta Ki Mang Hei Ki Gata Sankhiya 466 Jis Per Appealkarta Ka Chak Bana Hei Tetha Ye Gata Uski Abadi Ke Sameep He Vahaan So Gata Sankhiya 600 Tak Jahaan Tak Appealkarta Ka Chak Bana Hai, Nali Ke Saath Saath Chak Road Prastavit Kiya Jave."
(2.) The Settlement Officer, Consolidation undertook a local inspection and ordered that - "Appealkarta Ko Chak Road Gata Sankhiya 466 Se Gata Sankhiya 480 Ke Dakkin Medh Tak Nali Ke Kinare Kinare Chak Road Dekar Gata Sankhiya 646 Me Jane Wali Chak Se Milaya Jata Hai.-" The appeal was accordingly allowed vide order dated 12-3-1992 and necessary modifications were effectuated in terms of the order in related Chaks including Chak No.109, which belongs to the petitioner. Feeling aggrieved against the appellate order dated 12-3-1992, the petitioner went up in revision under Section 48 of the Act. The Deputy Director of Consolidation found that Chak Road was rightly provided by the Settlement Officer, Consolidation. Seeing no justification to upset the application order he dismissed the revision, vide order dated 20-11-1992 as having no force. Hence the instant petition.
(3.) Sri Sankatha Rai, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner assailed the impugned orders on the solitary ground that Chak roads in the Unit having already been provided for, in the statement of principles prepared by the Asstt. Consolidation Officer, in consultation with the Consolidation Committee under Section 8A of the Act and the location of the same having not been demurred to under Section 9 of the Act, the matter attained finality under sub-section (3) of Section 9B and any demand under Section 28 for any other Chak road not already provided for in the statement of principles, being not comprehended by the Act, the Settlement Officer, Consolidation acted illegally and without jurisdiction in making provision for a chak Road while deciding the appeal under Section 21 of the Act preferred by respondent No.4. Elaborating his submissions, Sri Sankath Rai urged that the Consolidation authorities, while entertaining objection, appeal or revision in respect of allotment of Chaks, have, in fact, no jurisdiction to make provision for a Chak Road not already provided for, in that, the claim if any, for a Chak road is entertainable only in proceeding under Section 9 read with Section 9B of the Act and if no objection is filed under Section 9(2) against the statement of principles drawn under Section 8A, the same becomes final under Section 9B(3) of the Act; not open to challenge at the stage of disposal of objection, appeal or revision arising out of proceeding for allotment of Chak.;