Awadhesh Singh vs Deputy Director Of Consolidation ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 26139 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:185063
 
Court No. - 48
 

 
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 3310 of 2023
 

 
Petitioner :- Awadhesh Singh
 
Respondent :- Deputy Director Of Consolidation And 5 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Shukla,Mohan Gupta
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Kamlesh Kumar Mishra,Sudhir Bharti
 

 
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

Heard Sri Ashok Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for petitioner, Sri Kamlesh Kumar Mishra and Sudhir Bharti, learned counsel for respondent No.3 and learned Standing Counsel for State.

Sri Ashok Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for petitioner has assailed the findings returned by the Deputy Director of Consolidation in the impugned order dated 29.05.2023 being perverse that petitioner was allotted chak having area more than his share on Gata No.559.

Learned counsel refers 'C.H. Form 23' annexed as annexure No.1 as well as averment mentioned in paragraph Nos. 23, 24 and 25 of writ petition that petitioner who has share of 0.638 hectare in plot No.559, has been allotted only 0.234 hectare of land, which is less than his original share, therefore, above referred finding was perverse.

Sri Kamlesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate, appearing on behalf of respondent No.3, who has contested case before the Deputy Director of Consolidation, has not able to refute the above referred submission on basis of record available and he fairly submits that matter can be remitted back to the Deputy Director of Consolidation to decide it afresh.

Learned Standing Counsel for State has also submitted that in the light of judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Krishnanand (Dead) through legal representatives and others Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation and others, (2015) 1 SCC 553 since apparently, finding returned by the Deputy Director of Consolidation are perverse to record, therefore, this Court may interfere in writ jurisdiction.

Considering the above referred submissions as well as records available along with this writ petition as well as that the finding returned by the Deputy Director of Consolidation are perverse, therefore, in view of Krishnanand (Dead) through legal representatives and others (supra) impugned order is legally unsustainable.

This Court is of the view that impugned orders do not survive and accordingly is hereby set aside and the matter is remitted to the Deputy Director of Consolidation to decide afresh after hearing the parties in accordance with law, expeditiously.

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.

Order Date :- 25.9.2023

P. Pandey