Allahabad High Court
Motilal And 2 Others vs District Magistrate/ Collector ... on 6 January, 2023
Bench: Dinesh Pathak
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 5
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 19 of 2023
Petitioner :- Motilal And 2 Others
Respondent :- District Magistrate/ Collector And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.
This writ petition has been filed, inter alia, for the following reliefs:
"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondent no. 1/District Magistrate/Collector, Banda to correct the Khatauni by incorporating the plot numbers of the Petitioners as per the judgments dated 06.09.1993, 10.05.1994, 20.07.1993, 23.07.1994, 30.05.1992, 20.11.1987, 21.12.1977, 05.02.1993, 15.11.1997, 21.09.1977 and 09.07.1977 as detailed in Paragraph no. 7 of the Writ Petition, passed by the Consolidation Authorities complying the provision of Section 6 (2) of UP Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 and the corrected Khatauni be issued to the Petitioner forthwith:
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 1/District Magistrate/Collector, Banda to consider and decide the Petitioner's application dated 9.12.2022 (contained in annexure No. 5 to the writ petition) in accordance with law forthwith considering the provision of Section 6 (2) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953."
In paragraph no. 7 of the writ petition petitioners have given detail of the cases and the date of orders passed by the concerned authorities, which have attained finality before cancellation of consolidation operation.
It is submitted that unit/village is de-notified under Section 6(1) of U.P.C.H. Act promulgated on 07.06.2016, however, before cancellation of the consolidation operation, orders passed by the consolidation authorities as averred in paragraph 7 of the writ petition have attained finality. Therefore, these orders are liable to be given effect to in the land record.
Learned Standing Counsel has contended that the grievance of the petitioners can more appropriately be redressed by the District Deputy Director of Consolidation, who may be directed to decide the fresh representation, to be moved by the petitioners showing their grievances, within a stipulated period as fixed by this Court.
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 with liberty to the petitioners to file a fresh representation before the District Deputy Director of Consolidation with respect to their grievances, as mentioned in the present writ petition, within a period of two weeks from today along with a certified copy of this order and self attested copy of the present petition, who shall, either himself or through the authority competent as required under the law, consider and decide the same in accordance with law by a reasoned and speaking order expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months thereafter, if there is no other legal impediment.
With the aforesaid observation, present writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 6.1.2023
Pkb/
