O.H. Mootham, C.J. - (1.) IN this appeal, which is from an order of Mr. Justice Jagdish Sahai dated 2 -4 -1958, the principal question which arises is the validity of Rule 34(3) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Rules.
(2.) PROCEEDINGS under the Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953, are in progress in the village in which the Appellants and Respondents Nos. 4 and 5 reside. The Assistant Consolidation Officer prepared a statement of plots and tenure -holders pursuant to Section 11 of the Act and in that statement the Appellants were recorded as sirdars of plot No. 92/2 and these Respondents as trespassers thereon, The Respondents disputed the correctness of this entry and filed an objection Under Sub -section (1) of Section 12 contending that they ought to be recorded as sirdars and the names of the Appellants expunged. That objection was dismissed by the Consolidation Officer on 20 -12 -1956. Thereupon the Respondents filed an appeal Under Rule 34(3) of the Rules before the Settlement Officer. That officer held that the Respondents had acquired the status of sirdars and by an order dated 28 -5 -1957, he allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the Consolidation Officer. An application in revision by the present Appellants to the Deputy Director, Consolidation, was dismissed on 26 -11 -1957. The Appellants then filed a petition in this Court Under Article 226 of the Constitution which was dismissed by the order the subject of the present appeal. The principal argument addressed to us is that no appeal lay from the order of the Consolidation Officer as Rule 34(3) is ultra vires the powers of the State Government and is invalid.
(3.) SECTION 12 of the Act, as it then stood and so far as is material, read thus: 12(1). Every person interested in disputing the correctness or nature of an entry in the statement published Under Section 11 or pointing out any omission therefrom shall within thirty days of the publication of the statement Under Sub -section (2) of Section 11, file objection, if any on the statement before the Assistant Consolidation Officer in the manner prescribed. (2) The Assistant Consolidation Officer shall, after hearing the parties, if necessary, on the objections filed Under Sub -section (1) together with the views of the Land Management Committee submit his report on those objections to the Consolidation Officer who shall, except as provided in Sub -section (4), dispose of the objections in the manner prescribed. (3) The decision of the Consolidation Officer shall, except as otherwise provided by or under this Act, be final.;