DARIAO SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. DY. DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION, U.P. CAMP AT BULANDSHAHR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN proceedings Under Section 12 -B of the UP Consolidation of Holdings Act (as the Act stood before its amendment in 1963), the Consolidation Officer made an order dated 19 -3 -1963 directing partition of the khata between the parties according to the shares specified by him in his order. An appeal against that order was filed by the Respondents, Sukhbir Singh and others, Under Section 12 -C of the Act. The appeal was allowed by the Settlement Officer (Consolidation) on 27 -5 -1963. The Petitioners applied in revision Under Section 48 of the Act and the revision application was dismissed on 7 -8 -1963 by the Deputy Director of Consolidation on the ground that it was not maintainable under the Act as amended in 1963. The Petitioners pray for certiorari.

(2.) SHRI G.N. Verma, Learned Counsel for the Petitioners, contends that the proviso to Section 47(1) of the UP Consolidation of Holdings (Amendment) Act, 1963 was attracted in this case and that the revisional jurisdiction conferred by Section 48, as amended in 1963, came into play and consequently the view taken by the Deputy Director while declining to entertain the revision application was

(3.) THIS is, therefore, a case where it cannot be said that a second appeal or revision lay under the provisions of the unamended Act. The proviso to Section 47(1) is not attracted and the case had to be disposed of in accordance with the provisions of the unamended Act. As regards the unamended Act, when Section 12C clearly provided that the order of the Settlement Officer (Consolidation) under that provision was final, the further remedy adopted by the Petitioners against that order was not available to them in law. The view taken by the Deputy Director in declining to entertain the revision application was perfectly sound and I am not satisfied that any ground has been made out for interference.