Court No. - 19
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 26843 of 2012 Petitioner :- Jawahar And Others Respondent :- D.D.C. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- A.K. Singh,Durga Charan Singh Yadav,Gorakh Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rishikesh Tripathi
Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai,J.
Order on C.M. Substitution Application No. 192125 of 2013
Sri Rishikesh Tripathi, Advocate states that he represents respondent nos. 2/1 to 2/3 and has filed his Vakalatnama in the office of the Court on 14.5.2019 and has no objection if the application is allowed.
Application is within time. Application is allowed.
Office is directed to carry out appropriate substitution in relation to respondent no. 2 as stated in the prayer clause of the application within a week.
Order Date :- 30.7.2019 IB
Court No. - 19
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 26843 of 2012 Petitioner :- Jawahar And Others Respondent :- D.D.C. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- A.K. Singh,Durga Charan Singh Yadav,Gorakh Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rishikesh Tripathi
Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai,J.
Heard the counsel for the petitioners and the counsel for the respondents.
The present writ petition has been filed against the order dated 30.4.2012 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Ghazipur. The dispute between the parties relates to the existence of the private tube well of the petitioners and whether the said tube well is situated in Plot No.673 or in Plot No.674. Plot No.674 is the original holding of the petitioner and Plot No.673 is a Chak road. In his order dated 30.4.2012, the Deputy Director of Consolidation after holding a spot inspection has recorded that the tube well of the petitioner is situated in Plot No.673 which is a Chak road and obstructing the movement of the villagers on the Chak road. The Deputy Director of Consolidation has also modified the shape of the Chaks to accommodate the petitioners. The order dated 30.4.2012 has been passed after making a spot inspection.
The counsel for the petitioners has not been able to show any error in the spot inspection report except that the findings in the said spot inspection are contrary to the entries in C.H.Form 2-A. C.H.Form 2-A is prepared during the partal and therefore, entries in C.H.Form 2-A cannot be sufficient ground to vitiate an order passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation after making a spot inspection for demarcation of Chaks.
For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition lacks merit and is dismissed.
Order Date :- 30.7.2019 IB