Allahabad High Court
Vinod Kumar Maurya vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others on 17 August, 2022
Bench: Dinesh Pathak
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 32
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 1751 of 2022
Petitioner :- Vinod Kumar Maurya
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- A.P.Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Present writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs :-
"(i) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Settlement Officer of Consolidation, Azamgarh to give effect to the order dated 17.09.1996 passed by Consolidation Officer in Case No. 3453 under Section 9A(2) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act (Vinod Kumar Maurya vs. Amrita Devi and Others) over the plot no. 306 having area 0.66 links situated in Village Pawai Ladpur, District Azamgarh in the revenue record pursuant to sub-section (2) of Section 6 of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act,
(ii) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding Settlement Officer of Consolidation, Azamgarh to decide the petitioner's application/representation dated 25.09.2021 by reasoned and speaking order after providing opportunity of hearing, within short stipulated time as fixed by this Hon'ble Court (contained as Annexure No.6 to the writ petition.)"
It is submitted that village Pawai Ladpur was notified under Section 4 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act (in brevity 'U.P.C.H. Act') on 13.09.1980. At the subsequent stage aforesaid notification was cancelled under Section 6(1) of the U.P.C.H. Act promulgated on 12.09.2017.
In paragraph nos. 6 to 10 of the writ petition it is averred that the order dated 17.09.1996 passed by the Consolidation Officer in Case No. 3453 under Section 9A(2) of the U.P.C.H. Act has attained finality before cancellation of notification under Section 6(1) of the U.P.C.H. Act. Paragraph nos. 6 to 10 are quoted herein below :-
"6. That by order of Assistant Consolidation Officer dated 08.06.1993 in Case No. 53 under Section 12 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, an order was passed by expunging the name of respondent no. 5 over plot no. 307 having area 0.018 links out of 840 links the name of Smt. Amrita Devi (since dead), wife of Harilal (mother of petitioner) be recorded as Bhumidhar, thereafter another mutation order was passed under section 12 by Assistant Consolidation Officer dated 24.03.1991 in case no. 885 regarding expunging the name of Respondent no. 5 were plot no. 307 Mn. having area 48 links out of 0.099 links and directed to mutate the name of Smt. Amrita w/o. Harilal (mother of petitioner) total area 0.66 links.
7. That an objection under section 9-A(2) has been filed by the petitioner before the Consolidation Officr bearing case no. 3453 (Vinod Kumar vs. Amrita Devi & Others) impleading the Amrita Devi wife of Hari Lal (mother of petitioner) and respondent No. 5, in which a compromise was took place in between parties and in terms of compromise it was directed by the Consolidation Officer to expunge the name of Amrita and respondent No.5 over plot No. 307 having area 0.66 hectare and be recorded in the name of petitioner, vide order dated 17.09.1996 in case no. 3453 (Vinod Kumar vs. Amrita Devi & Other).
8. That the name of Smt. Amrita Devi, widow of Harilal over plot no. 307 having area 0.066 hectare be expunged along with the name of Abhimanyu son of Arjun and be recorded in the name of petitioner as Bhumidhar. A true copy of the CH Form No. 11 in which endorsement of the order dated 22.01.1987 passed by the Assistant Consolidation Officer in case no. 418 and order dated 08.04.1983 passed by Assistant Consolidation Officer in Case No. 53 and order dated 17.09.1996 passed by Consolidation Officer in Case No. 3453 under Section 9A-2 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act ((Vinod Kumar Maurya vs. Amrita Devi). Copies of the orders of Consolidation Officer is being filed herewith and marked as Annexure No.1 to this writ petition.
9. That on account of publication of Section 6(1) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, the consolidation proceedings has been withdrawn and that's why the separate khata in the name of petitioner in CH Form No. 23 could not be created.
10. That it is relevant to mention here that the order dated 17.09.1996 attained finality as neither restoration nor appeal or revision has been filed by any of the party and in this regard the petitioner has filed copy of questionnaire obtained in the office of Consolidation regarding the filing of any restoration application against the order dated 17.09.1996 in case no. 3453 and was replied in negative. A true copy/xerox of the questionnaire dated 01.09.2021/06.09.2021 issued by the Officer of Consolidation Officer, Sadar, Azamgarh is being filed and marked as Annexure No. 2 to this writ petition."
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the consolidation authorities are under legal obligation to implement the order passed by the Consolidation Officer relating to correction of land record before cancelling the consolidation operation. In support of his submission, he has placed reliance on the judgment passed by this Court in Writ-B No. 696 of 2021 (Shankar Lal vs. State of U.P. & Others).
In this conspectus as above, no useful purpose would be served to keep this matter pending. Therefore, this court deems it appropriate to finally dispose of the present writ petition.
I am of the opinion that the consolidation authorities are under legal obligation to comply with the order dated 17.09.1996 passed by the Consolidation Officer to implement it in the revenue record. The petitioner is at liberty to move a fresh representation before the District Deputy Director of Consolidation (Respondent no. 2) showing his grievance, as mentioned in the present petition, who shall consider and decide the same after conducting proper enquiry with respect to the finality of the order dated 17.09.1996 passed by the Consolidation Officer and correct the revenue entries accordingly and also issue a fresh Khatauni, in case there is no other legal impediment, preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
With the aforesaid observation/direction, the writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 17.8.2022
VR
