RAJAN ROY,J. - (1.) Heard.
(2.) The dispute relates to chak allotment between the parties. Both of them have purchased half of Gata No. 585 and 586. The possession based on the sale deed was such that the land of both the parties touched the chak road on the western side of the Gata. Initially the chak allotted to the parties was west to east with the result that the chak of both the parties touched the sector road accordingly they had access to their land directly from the said road. Being aggrieved,the matter ultimately came up before this Court by means of Writ Petition No. 496 (Consolidation) of 2007 which was decided on 22.7.2016 in the following terms: "Heard Sri D.C. Tewari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Arun Prakash Shukla for the opposite parties. Petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 13.7.2007 passed by D.D.C. by which an earlier order passed by him has been recalled. Petitioner has taken a legal ground that against the order passed by D.D.C. opposite parties could have moved a writ petition but instead of that he has preferred an application for recall which has been illegally allowed by the D.D.C. and fresh orders have been passed. This is patently illegal and could not have been passed but counsel for opposite parties says that earlier order of D.D.D. was passed behind his back and it was an ex-parte order. The opposite parties did not have any other option except to get it recalled bringing the fact to the knowledge of the D.D.C. that he has not been heard. In any view of the matter, the fact remains that there is factual dispute regarding the chack. Both the parties want that their chaks to be adjusted in such a manner that the chak road adjoins both of them. Since the matter involves factual aspects, it will be in the interest of justice that it may be remanded back to D.D.C. concerned once again to decide it afresh after hearing both the parties who are present before this Court and seeking evidence. In view of above, orders dated 13.07.2007 and 8.2.2006 passed by the opposite party No.1 in reference No.739 under Section-48 (3) C.H.Act, are hereby set aside. The matter is remanded back to the D.D.C.concerned to decide the case afresh within a maximum period of two months from the date a certified copy of this order is placed before him. However, it is made clear that this order of remand has not been passed on merits. The D.D.C. shall apply his mind afresh on the facts of the case and shall be free to come to his own conclusion without being influenced by this order and after hearing all the necessary parties once again giving them proper notice and opportunity of hearing. Till the D.D.C. decides the matter finally the parties shall maintain status-quo as it exists today over the land in dispute. With these observations the petition stands disposed of."
(3.) The Court remanded the matter back to the DDC for consideration afresh. However, on a perusal of the said order the Court finds that no specific deficiency was pointed out except that it was a factual matter.;