Court No. - 9
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 149 of 2019 Petitioner :- Jai Prakash And 4 Others Respondent :- Deputy Director Consolidation And 20 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Virendra Singh,Ajit Pratap Kushwaha Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Kumar,Ramesh Chandra Upadhyay
Hon'ble Anjani Kumar Mishra,J.
Sri Shrikrishna Mishra, advocate has filed his power on behalf of respondent no.5, which is taken on record.
Heard counsel for the petitioners and counsel for respondent no.5.
The instant writ petition arises out of proceedings for allotment of chaks and seeks quashing of the order dated 18.09.2015 passed by the Consolidation Officer, the order dated 16.04.2016 passed by the Settlement Officer, Consolidation and the orders dated 17.10.2016 and 17.10.2018 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation.
It is therefore, clear that all the courts below have decided against the petitioners.
Before this Court, the contention of counsel for the petitioners is that he is confining his submissions to chak no.304 allotted on plot no.378 and 379.
His submission is that on the northern side of the chak certain tree plants have been planted by the petitioners which stand excluded from their chak and secondly that the parties were cultivating the land as per the shares since for a long time and therefore, at the Assistant Consolidation Officer stage the proposed chaks of the petitioners were as per their possession, which has unnecessarily being disturbed by the consolidation authorities, without any reason.
It is not in disputed that the three persons who have been allotted chaks over the aforesaid plot nos.378 and 379 are its original holders and each has been allotted a chak thereon.
In so far as all the trees planted by the petitioners over their land is concerned, the provisions of the Act safeguard the interest of a person whose trees stand excluded from his chak inasmuch as such person can apply for and be given the valuation of the such trees. Therefore, the allotment made is not liable to be interfered on this ground.
It is also argued by counsel for the petitioners that a chak-road has unnecessarily carved out through the plot allotted to him. However, no such arguments has been raised before the Deputy Director of Consolidation. This argument, if at all, has been raised in a review application which application was definitely not maintainable inasmuch as the consolidation authorities do not possess the power of review. This argument was definitely not raised when the revision itself was decided by the order dated 27.10.2016.
Moreover, no irreparable injury that may have been occasioned to the petitioners for the orders impugned would be pointed out by counsel for the petitioners. Besides in consolidation operations and in the process of carvation of chaks, tenure holders have to part possession of land which may have been in their possession since a very long time. Without such parting of possession consolidation operations would be an impossibility. Therefore, nothing turns upon even the second contention raised on behalf of the petitioners.
Under the circumstances, I do not find any justification to entertain the writ petition. The writ petition therefore, fails and is dismissed.
Order Date :- 22.1.2019 Jitendra