Ram Surat Ram (Maurya), J. - (1.) HEARD Sri O.P. Pandey for the petitioners and Sri Ashok Kumar Singh for the contesting respondents. The writ petition has been filed against the order of Settlement Officer Consolidation dated 9.3.2011 allowing the appeal filed by Devi Prasad and others and set aside the order of Consolidation Officer dated 3.12.2004 passed in the proceeding under Rule 109 -A and the order of Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 17.3.2015 dismissing the revision of the petitioners filed against the aforesaid order.
(2.) ON the basis of the order of Consolidation Officer dated 22.2.1967 the proceeding under Rule 109 -A was initiated by the petitioners before Consolidation Officer and the Consolidation Officer by order dated 3.12.2004 decided the proceeding and demarcated the chaks of the parties on the spot. On the allegation that Consolidation Officer has not given any notice before passing the order dated 3.12.2004. A recall application has been filed by Suresh Chandra and others before the Consolidation Officer. The recall application was rejected by the Consolidation Officer by the order dated 19.5.2007. The revision filed by Suresh Chandra and others were also dismissed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation by order dated 8.9.2008. Thereafter Devi Prasad and others filed an appeal under Rule 109 -A(3) of the Rules against the order dated 3.12.2004 before the Settlement Officer Consolidation alongwith delay condonation application. The delay condonation application as well as appeal both were decided by the Settlement Officer Consolidation by order dated 9.3.2011 by a composite order. The operative portion of the order reads as "delay under section 5 of the Limitation Act is condoned and the appeal is allowed. Order dated 3.12.2004 is set aside. The matter is remanded to Consolidation Officer for deciding the application of the petitioner in accordance with law." The revision filed by the petitioner against the aforesaid order has also been dismissed.
(3.) THE Counsel for the petitioners submits that Suresh Chandra and others were co -shares of Devi Prasad and others were joint chak holder in the chak in dispute. Suresh Chandra and others filed a recall application before the Consolidation Officer on 18.11.2006 therefore their other co -sharers have also got knowledge of the order dated 3.12.2004 at that time itself but the appeal was filed on 17.7.2010. Thus there was no cause for condoning the inordinate delay but the delay has been illegally condoned. He further submits that after condoning the delay, the Settlement Officer Consolidation was required to hear is the appeal on merit afresh but by a composite order he simultaneously allowed the appeal also without recording any finding in this respect. The order of Settlement Officer Consolidation was illegal but the revision filed by the petitioners has been illegally dismissed.;