Ram Surat Ram (Maurya), J. - (1.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for State of U.P. and Shri Ajit Kumar Singh holding brief of Shri Ajay Kumar, for respondent No. 4. The writ petition has been filed against the order of Assistant Settlement officer of Consolidation dated 30.6.1993 and the Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 26.8.2003.
(2.) IT is alleged that plot No. 5214, 6414, 6415 and 6416 of Village Baragaon Pargana District Banda, were original holding of the petitioner. Initially the valuation of these plots were determined @ 30 paisa. The petitioner filed an objection under section 9 -B of U.P. Consolidation Holdings Act. The Consolidation Officer after spot inspection and after hearing the consolidation committee by order dated 23.3.1990 enhanced the valuation of the aforesaid plots from 30 paisa to 70 paisa. This order was not challenged by any one.
(3.) IT appears that there had several chak appeals under section 21 of the Act which were consolidated and decided by Assistant Settlement Officer of Consolidation, Banda. It is alleged that the petitioner was not given any notice of the chak appeals. However, Assistant Settlement Officer Consolidation, Banda by the order dated 30.6.1993 not only disturb the chak of the petitioner but also reduced the valuation of the original holding of the petitioner of plot Nos. 5214, 6414, 6414, 6415 and 6416 from 70 paisa to 10 paisa. Due to order of Assistant Settlement Officer Consolidation, material prejudiced has been caused to the petitioner. Therefore, the transferor of the petitioner filed a revision before Deputy Director of Consolidation. The Deputy Director of Consolidation by the order dated 26.2.2003 decided the revision along with the chak revision but dismissed the revision only on the ground that transferor of the petitioner has already sold her chak as such the revision filed by her was not maintainable. Thereafter, the petitioners filed a separate revision. The Deputy Director of Consolidation by subsequent orders dated 26.8.2003 found that as the order of Settlement Officer of Consolidation has already been upheld by the order dated 26.5.2003 as such he had no jurisdiction to pass a fresh order in the matter.;