S.K.Singh, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Rai, learned Advocate, in support of this petition and Sri Satya Prakash, learned Advocate who appeared for the respondents.
(2.) Challenge in this petition is the order passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation by which revision filed by the opposite party has been allowed and petitioner's chak has been disturbed. Submission of learned Counsel for the petitioner is that allotment of plot No. 624 in favour of the petitioner stood maintained upto the stage of the appellate authority but the Deputy Director of Consolidation without assigning any cogent reason took away the entire area of plot No. 624 from the petitioners chak although petitioner is admittedly co-sharer in that plot and that plot is situated near abadi and that was needed for extension of the abadi and thus Deputy Director of Consolidation has committed error. Submission is that need of the petitioner was there and, therefore unless the spot inspection was made the Deputy Director of Consolidation was not justified in disturbing the petitioner.
(3.) Sri Satya Prakash, learned Advocate who appeared for the respondent No. 3 submits that his client is co-sharer in plot No. 624 and the Deputy Director of Consolidation treating the need of the respondent more urgent in comparison to the petitioner proposed to give plot No. 624 in the chak of the respondent No. 2 and 3 then that being equitable adjustment no exception can be taken to it. Submission is that such and every plot of tenure holder is not to be given in his chak and therefore on this ground the judgment of the Deputy Director of Consolidation needs no interference.;