S.K.Singh, J. - (1.) Challenge in this petition is the judgment of Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 12.10.2001 by which revision filed by the opposite party was allowed.
(2.) The proceedings are under section 20 of UPCH Act which relates to allotment of chak between the parties. Needless to say that both parties can never be satisfied and it is not possible to satisfy both parties in its entirety and therefore, the concern of the Court should be that whether the petitioner has suffered any prejudice calling for interference.
(3.) So far as the case in hand is conceded the dispute appears to be allotment of plot No. 1211 which is admittedly the original holding of the petitioner. There is also no dispute about the fact that in plot No. 1211, petitioner's boring is situated. There is also no dispute about the fact that in the aforesaid plot petitioner's share is 163 air. The petitioner was allotted 139 air at the stage of Assistant Consolidation Officer On objection filed by the opposite party that allotment was maintained and that remained confirmed up to the stage of Settlement Officer Consolidation. It is before the Revisional Court, an area of 90 air has been taken away from the petitioner's chak and has been given to the opposite party and thus petitioner is left with an area of 49 air on plot No. 1211 and major portion has been given to the opposite party.;