S.K.SINGH, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri C.K. Rai, learned Advocate in support of this peti­tion and Sri O.P. Singh, 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 respondents have been allowed and changes in the chak of the petitioners has been made. Proceedings are under section 20 of the U.P.C.H. Act which is in respect to al­lotment of plots in the chaks of the parties.
(3.) SUBMISSION of learned Counsel for the petitioners is that on account of judgment of the Deputy Director of Consolida­tion petitioners have suffered prejudice inasmuch as the chak of the petitioners has become multi cornered and at the same time plots which were given in the peti­tioners chak which remain confirmed up till stage of the appellate authority has been disturbed without assigning any cogent reason and without considering the hard­ship and inconvenience which the petition­ers are to suffer. Submission is that the judgment of the Deputy Director of Con­solidation is one sided and the relief which has been given to the respondents is on just their asking and that too in an illegal man­ner. Lastly it is submitted that in respect to plot No. 261 which was reserved for pri­mary pathshala in the statement of princi­ple, no objection was filed by the owner of that plot, as provided in law under section 9-B of the U.P.C.H. Act, therefore, at the stage of the Deputy Director of Consolida­tion by making an observation that reser­vation to plot No. 137 is unjust is also to­tally illegal and without jurisdiction. Sub­mission is that although there is an obser­vation in the judgment that spot has been seen and the matter has been heard thereaf­ter but that is incorrect. It is on these facts order of Deputy Director of Consolidation has been argued to be interfered.;