RAJIV JOSHI, J. - (1.) Heard Sri. Rakesh Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Gaurav Singh, learned standing counsel appearing for respondent no. 1 to 4. By this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 18.5.2018 passed by District Director of Consolidation, Rampur as well as the order dated 4.1.2017 passed by the Consolidation Officer, by which the preliminary objection raised by the petitioner regarding maintainability of the restoration application for recalling the order of Consolidation Officer, has been rejected.
(2.) The facts as reflect from record are that an application under section 12 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was filed by the petitioner for recording his name on the ground that that the land in dispute was allotted to him by respondent no. 5-U.P. Bhu-Daan Yagya Samiti. The said application was rejected by the Consolidation Officer vide order dated 26.4.2013. Challenging the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal which was allowed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation vide order dated 18.7.2013 and the matter was remanded for decision afresh.
(3.) After the remand, an objection was filed by panel lawyer on behalf of the State Government/Gaon Sabha. However, the said objection was considered and ultimately the petitioner's application under section 12 of the Act was allowed by the Consolidation Officer vide order dated 12.3.2015. Subsequently, an application was moved by the panel lawyer on 30.6.2016 for recalling the order dated 12.3.2015 on the ground that the order was an ex parte order and that even respondent no. 5-U.P. Bhu-Daan Yagya Samiti had executed any Patta in favour of the petitioner and under the scheme of Bhu-Daan Samiti, the Collector is empowered to execute Patta.;