Krishna Murari, J. - (1.) Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ayub Khan, learned Counsel for contesting respondent No. 2.
(2.) This petition arises out of chak allotment proceeding. The dispute relates to plot No. 386 which is original holding of both the parties. Both of them have equal share. At the stage of Assistant Consolidation Officer both the parties were proposed chak including major portion of plot No. 386 in accordance with their share. An objection was filed by the contesting respondent claiming abolition of his second chak and allotment of a single compact chak. The Consolidation Officer vide order dated 9.1.2006 allowed the objection and allotted entire area of plot No. 386 in the chak of the contesting respondent. Aggrieved, the petitioner preferred an appeal which was numbered as appeal No. 566. The Settlement Officer Consolidation vide order dated 17.4.2006 allowed the same with a finding that the petitioner being the co-sharer to the extent of 1/2 share of plot No. 386 which was also largest part of his original holding has wrongly been deprived of and the chak of the parties were relegated back to the stage of Assistant Consolidation Officer. The contesting respondent No. 2 went up in revision before the Deputy Director of Consolidation which has been allowed vide impugned order dated 21.9.2006.
(3.) The Deputy Director of Consolidation has allowed the revision of the contesting respondent on the ground that during the course of argument it was point out by him that his private source of irrigation exists on the western side of plot No. 396 as such in the interest of justice he is allotted chak at the stage of Consolidation Officer.;