- (1.) KRISHNA Murari, J. Heard Sri H. M. Srivastava, holding brief of Sri V. S. Rajpoot learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri V. K. Jaiswal, learned Counsel for contesting respondent Nos. 2 to 5.
(2.) THIS petition arises out of chak allotment proceedings. The petitioner is chak holder No. 78 and respondent Nos. 2 to 5 are chak holder No. 336. Against the proposed allowed the petitioner filed objection demanding plot No. 78 which was situate near abadi and constituted largest part of his original holding. The Consolidation Officer vide order dated 23-3-2005 rejected the said objection. Appeal filed by the petitioner was allowed by Settlement Officer Consolidation and plot No. 78 was allotted in his chak. Feeling aggrieved, the contesting respondent Nos. 2 to 5 filed revision which has been allowed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation vide impugned order dated 29-9-2005. It has been urged by learned Counsel for the petitioner that plot No. 78 is the largest part of his original holding but he has been deprived of the same by the Deputy Director of Consolidation without assigning any reason. In reply it has been submitted that respondent Nos. 2 to 5 are also co-tenure holder of the said plot and hence, the same has rightly been allotted in their chak.
(3.) FROM the pleadings in the writ petition, it is clear that the petitioner has 1/6th share in plot No. 78 and the share of respondent Nos. 2 to 5 also 1/6th. The said plot is situate near abadi and both the parties are having share in the same. From a perusal of the impugned judgment of the Deputy Director of Consolidation it is clear that the area of plot No. 78 allotted in the chak of the petitioner by the Settlement Officer Consolidation has been taken out without assigning any reason only on the ground that it is the original holding of respondent Nos. 2 to 5. The Deputy Director of Consolidation failed to consider that the petitioner was also having 1/6th share in the said plot and it was also his original holding. Under the provision of Section 19 of the Act every tenure-holder is entitled to be allotted a compact chak over the largest part of his original holding as far as possible. Unless there are strong and compelling reasons no tenure- holder should normally be deprived of his original holding.;