Allahabad High Court
Ram Keras And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And 12 Others on 18 August, 2022
Bench: Dinesh Pathak
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 32
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 1208 of 2022
Petitioner :- Ram Keras And 2 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 12 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- A.P.Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sher Bahadur Yadav
Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents no. 1 to 3, learned counsel for private respondents no.4 to 6 and perused the record.
In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case and the order proposed to be passed hereunder, this Court proceeds to finally decide the matter at the admission stage, with the consent of the counsel for the parties present, without putting notice to private respondent nos. 7 to 9 with liberty to them to move a recall application, in case any fact in the petition is found incorrect.
A short question is involved in the present writ petition qua correctness of the amendment chart appended with the judgment and order dated 27.10.2014 passed by the Settlement Officer of Consolidation (in brevity 'SOC').
Grievance of the petitioners is that the Deputy Director of Consolidation (in brevity 'DDC') has illegally not adverted to the grievance of the petitioners qua incorrect chart prepared at the stage of SOC against the intent of the judgment and order dated 27.10.2014.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that against the order passed by the Consolidation Officer, two appeals were preferred being Appeal Nos. 120 and 121. Both the appeals were decided by the SOC vide its judgment and order dated 27.10.2014. Unfortunately, amendment chart appended to the judgment passed by the SOC was not prepared in consonance with the intention of the judgment and order dated 27.10.2014. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioners have filed a restoration application against the judgment and order dated 27.10.2014 which was rejected vide order dated 29.08.2017. Having been aggrieved against the orders dated 27.10.2014 and 29.08.2017, two revisions were preferred on behalf of the petitioners being Revision Nos. 217 and 218. The DDC has dismissed both the revisions without adverting to the grievance of the petitioners.
Perusal of the impugned order passed by the DDC reveals that he has not adverted to the plea of the petitioners qua incorrect preparation of amendment chart appended with the order dated 27.10.2014 passed by the SOC.
In this view of the matter, I found substance in the submissions advanced by counsel for the petitioners, therefore, the instant writ petition on the limited point to examine the correctness of the amendment chart appended to the judgment and order dated 27.10.2014 passed by the SOC deserves to be allowed and the order dated 01.04.2022 passed by the DDC is liable to be quashed. As such, instant writ petition succeeds and allowed. Order dated 01.04.2022 passed by the DDC in revision nos. 217 and 218 is hereby quashed. Revisions before the DDC are restored to its file. Parties are relegated before the DDC on the limited point, as mentioned above, who shall consider and decide the matter in terms of the order of the date, expeditiously, preferably within a period of one month from the date of production of certified copy of this order. Both the parties are directed to appear before the DDC on 31.08.2022.
Order Date :- 18.8.2022
VR
