RAM SURAT RAM (MAURYA),J. - (1.) Heard Sri B.N. Singh for the petitioner and Standing Counsel for the respondents.
(2.) The writ petition has been filed against the order of District Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 11.1.2005 by which he has held that the order of Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 23.8.1987 was an ex -parte order, accordingly, it was recalled and old plot nos. 82 area 1.20 acre and 98 area 2.62 acre of village Alikhanpur, pargana Haveli, district Jaunpur was directed to be recorded as banjar land.
(3.) The counsel for the petitioner submits that in the interest of people of the village, the Land Management Committee has allotted the land in disputed to Shitla Devi, Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Chaukia, Jaunpur. On the basis of allotment made by the Land Management Committee, the Sub Divisional Officer by order dated 28.11.1969 passed in Case No. 735 directed for recording name of Shitla Devi, Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Chaukia, Jaunpur as sirdar. This entry was continued in basic consolidation year and no one filed any objection against it. Since Shitla Devi, Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Chaukia, Jaunpur was not in existence as such the Consolidation Committee moved an application before the Deputy Director of Consolidation for reserving the land in disputed as the land reserved for school instead of Shitla Devi, Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Chaukia, Jaunpur. On that application the Deputy Director of Consolidation by the order dated 23.8.1987 directed for recording the land as reserved for school of the village. The order of Deputy Director of Consolidation does not suffer from any illegality but it has been illegally recalled by the District Deputy Director of Consolidation by the impugned order dated 11.1.2005. He relied upon the judgment of this Court in Gaon Samaj, Didhauni v. Deputy Director of Consolidation and others, 1969 RD page 5 in which it has been held that finality attached under Section 9 B (3) of UP Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 does not affect the jurisdiction of Deputy Director of Consolidation under Section 48 of UP Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 . He submits that order of Deputy Director of Consolidation was well within the jurisdiction. In any case the order was passed on merit and District Deputy Director of Consolidation has no jurisdiction to recall that order.;