- (1.) S. K. Singh, J. Heard Sri Vimal Kumar, learned Advocate holding brief of Sn Ganga Prasad, learned Advocate in support of this petition.
(2.) NOTICES meant for the respondent will be deemed to have been served. Writ petition is of the year 1990 and that relates to allotment of chak proceedings and therefore as about 18 years has already passed, writ petition is being finally decided. Writ petition relates to the reference proceedings and thus petitioner challenges the order passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 5. 7. 1990 by which reference was approved and petitioner's claims to have been disturbed. Submission of learned Counsel for the petitioner is that Deputy Director of Consolidation has approved the reference in mechanical manner without assigning any reason and without considering petitioner's objection on account of which petitioner has suffered serious prejudice. Submission is that petitioners confirmed chak which was near Abadi having other facilities has been disturbed in the reference proceeding without any reason just on mere asking of the respondent and therefore, order passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, needs interference. In view of the aforesaid, this Court is to decide the matter.
(3.) THERE appears to be no dispute about the fact that objection was filed by the petitioner before the Deputy Director of Consolidation challenging the proposal by way of reference. Various things have been said in the objection. Petitioner claims to be disturbed in respect to his placement which was near Abadi and otherwise also to be effected in various-manner. On perusal of the order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation it is clear that it is just mechanical and just like putting a rubber seal on the proposed reference. It has been repeatedly said by this Court that Deputy Director of Consolidation being the highest Court in the hierarchy is supposed to apply its mind in the light of the fact and objections if is taken by a party while approving the reference. Application of mind can only be gathered by reasons and thus giving of reason for judicial order is must. As order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation is mechanical without application of mind, this Court cannot ascertain that what prevailed in the mind of the Deputy Director of Consolidation in not accepting petitioner's objection and in approving the reference. Thus, this Court is satisfied that by non application of mind by not touching objection of the petitioner, petitioner has suffered serious prejudice which needs fresh attention of the Deputy Director of Consolidation. Accordingly, this writ petition succeeds and is allowed and the order passed by the Dy. Director of Consolidation dated 5. 7. 1990 is hereby quashed. Dy. Director of Consolidation is directed to revive the reference proceeding on filing certified copy of this order which petitioner undertakes to file within a period of three weeks from today and to decide the same in accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to all the concerned preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Petition Allowed. .;