Court No. - 22
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 5738 of 1987 Petitioner :- Charan Singh Respondent :- D.D.C.
Counsel for Petitioner :- S.S. Tyagi,K.R.Sirohi,Yogesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- S.C.,J.S.P.Singh,R.P.S.Chauhan,Rahul Kumar Tyagi,Shams Uz Zaman
Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai,J.
Heard the counsel for the petitioner.
The present writ petition has been filed against the order dated 24.6.1986 and 2.3.1987 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Meerut in Reference No.2074 registered under Section 48(3) of the U.P Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as Act, 1953).
A plot of the petitioner valued at 43.88 was declared surplus vide order dated 31.3.1975 passed by the Prescribed Authority under the Ceiling Act. However, it appears that the land of the petitioner declared surplus by the Prescribed Authority was included in the revenue records in the name of the petitioner and consequently, Chaks were allotted to the petitioner including the aforesaid plot. The Deputy Director of Consolidation on a reference passed the order dated 24.6.1986 withdrawing from the Chak of the petitioner land equal to valuation of 43.88. Against the order dated 24.6.1986, the petitioner filed a recall application alleging that the order was ex parte and was passed without issuing any notice to the petitioner. The recall application was dismissed vide order dated 2.3.1987 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation.
It is evident from the record that through the order dated 24.6.1986, the Deputy Director of Consolidation has merely withdrawn the land equal to valuation of holding which were declared surplus under the Ceiling Act and were erroneously allotted to the petitioner during the consolidation proceedings.
The counsel for the petitioner was not able to show any illegality in the aforesaid order. There is no jurisdictional error in the order passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation. Hence, the challenge to the order dated 24.6.1986 is rejected.
The order dated 2.3.1987 has been passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation after considering the records and on the ground that the petitioner was present at the time of hearing of the case, as he and his counsel had signed the Order Sheet of the case. The order has been passed after examining the order sheet of the proceedings before the Deputy Director. The findings in the order dated 2.3.1987 are based on evidence on record and thus the challenge to the said order is also rejected.
It has been further argued by the counsel for the petitioner that the contribution to be made by the petitioner under the Act, 1953 were deducted after determining the same from the total valuation of the plots shown in Form C.H. 23 of the petitioner which included the holdings declared surplus under the Ceiling Act. By the impugned order dated 24.6.1986, the surplus holdings have also been withdrawn from the Chak of the petitioner thereby causing loss to the petitioner while deducting more than the requisite contributions specified in the statement of Principles published under Section 8-A(2) (b) of the Act, 1953.
The petitioner is permitted to file an application before the Deputy Director of Consolidation who shall look into the matter and in case the contributions of the petitioner are more than what was declared in the statement of Principles, after excluding the land of the petitioner declared surplus under the Ceiling Act, the Deputy Director of Consolidation shall pass appropriate orders under law rectifying the said defect. It is clarified that so far as the order dated 24.6.1986 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation withdrawing the surplus land from the Chaks allotted to the petitioner is concerned, the same is being upheld by this Court and the present order.
With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 27.2.2019 IB