Smt. Murta Devi And 2 Others vs State Of U P And 8 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 10407 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 30
 

 
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 1389 of 2022
 

 
Petitioner :- Smt. Murta Devi And 2 Others
 
Respondent :- State Of U P And 8 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Saroj Kumar Yadav
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi
 

 
Hon'ble Chandra Kumar Rai,J.

Heard Mr. Saroj Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 6 and Mr. Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for respondent No.7 i.e. Land Management Committee.

Respondent Nos.8 and 9 are the Consolidation Officer and Assistant Consolidation Officer, who have been impleaded by name, so there is no necessity to issue notice to respondent Nos.8 and 9 as learned Standing Counsel has been heard on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 6.

There is report of Stamp reporter with respect to laches of 454 days in filing writ petition which has been explained in paragraph No.35 of the writ petition.

The instant writ petition has been filed on the ground that without affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioners impugned order dated 23.12.2020 has been passed by which petitioners' long standing entries has been expunged with respect to disputed plots.

The questions involved in this writ petition and the questions that were raised, considered and answered by this Court vide judgment and orders dated 15.11.2021, 01.07.2021 and 28.07.2021 in Writ-B Nos. 2000 of 2021 (Suresh Kumar and another Vs. DDC and 6 others), Writ-B No561 of 2021 (Makhanchu vs. State of U.P. and 3 others), Writ-B No.575 of 2021 (Lautu Ram and another vs. State of U.P. and 3 others) respectively are similar. Aforesaid writ petitions were allowed and matters were remanded back before Consolidation Officer for passing fresh orders in accordance with law after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties. Para Nos. 16 and 17 of Writ-B No.2000 of 2021 is as follows:

"16. It is, thus, apparent that no notice or opportunity of hearing was afforded by responddnt-2, Consolidation Officer, Kirtapur, District-Jaunpur to petitioners before passing the impugned order dated 23.12.2020. As such, impugned order dated 23.12.2020 has been passed in complete violation of principles of natural justice. Moreover, by means of impugned order, survey plot no.4119 (M) area 0.05 hectares allotted in the chak of father of petitioners, has been taken out, but no adjustment has been made. As such, impugned order has caused serious civil consequences and also prejudice to petitioners. Consequently, order impugned cannot be sustained and, therefore, liable to be quashed.

17. As a result, this writ petition succeeds and is allowed. Impugned order dated 23rd December, 2020 passed by respondent-2, Consolidation Officer, Kirtapur, District-Jaunpur is hereby quashed. The proceeding stands restored before the Consolidation Officer concerned."

In view of the facts and circumstances of this case as well as law laid down in Writ (B) No.2001 of 2021, Writ - B No.561 of 2021 and Writ - B No.575 of 2021, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 23.12.2020 passed by respondent No.5 Consolidation Officer, Kirtapur, Jaunpur is set aside and matter is remanded back before Consolidation Officer to decide the Case No.573 of 2020 (State of U.P. Vs. Murta Devi), Case No.577 of 2020 (State of U.P. Vs. Murta Devi) and Case No.579 of 2020 (State of U.P. Vs.Vidyawati Devi) on merits after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioners expeditiously preferably within a period of four months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

Order Date :- 17.8.2022/PS*