A.P. Sahi, J. - (1.) Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel.
(2.) The facts, which are not in dispute, are that the petitioners have their original holdings over plot Nos. 454 and 455, apart from other plots. This is evident from C.H. Form 23. The matter has travelled up to this Court on account of the fact that one Mohammad Aslam, who is chak holder of chak No. 459 was favoured with adjustments, and the petitioner was adjusted over the area which has been allotted to the chak holder No. 459. As a result of this adjustment the petitioners' original holdings over plot Nos. 454 and 455 was shifted Northwards and the remaining land in between was kept as Bachat land as is evident from the certified copy of the adjustment chart produced by the learned Counsel for the petitioners before this Court. It is evident that an area of 0.84 has been taken out of plot No. 454 and allocated as Bachat land.
(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioners with the help of the chak map has invited the attention of the Court that as a result of such adjustment the Bachat land has now intervened between the chak of the petitioners and the road bordering district Bijnor. It is not disputed that on the boundary of district Bijnor there is a road of approximately one Latha adjoining to which the plots of the petitioners namely plot Nos. 454 and 455 are situated.;