Court No. - 9
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 180 of 2019 Petitioner :- Kathula Respondent :- District Deputy Director Of Consolidation And 8 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Arimardan Singh Rajpoot Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Anuj Kumar
Hon'ble Anjani Kumar Mishra,J.
Case called out in the revised list. None has appeared to press this writ petition.
Vide order dated 24.01.2019, learned Standing Counsel had been directed to obtain instructions. Counsel for the petitioner had also been granted time to file original allotment allegedly made in his favour.
On 07.02.2019, copy of the instruction received by learned Standing Counsel was served upon counsel for the petitioner to enable him to examine the same.
Today, on the matter being called out, as noticed above, Counsel for the petitioner has failed to appear.
Learned Standing Counsel has stated that the original record is available for perusal by the Court.
The instant writ petition is directed against the orders dated 13.07.2006, 20.11.2006 and 16.03.2018 passed by the respondents 3, 2 and 1 respectively.
It appears that a time barred objection under Section 9-A (2) was filed by Kathula, the petitioner, praying that the plot no.557/1 be recorded in his name on the basis of an allotment made in his favour by the Land Management Committee.
The objection filed by the petitioner claiming on the basis of alleged allotment made in his favour was rejected by the Consolidation Officer, vide order dated 13.07.2006, on the ground that the said allotment was made in favour of Baijnath and others. No allotment had been made in favour of the petitioner.
This finding has been affirmed upon dismissal of the appeal and revision filed by the petitioner.
The record that has been produced by learned Standing counsel clearly establishes that the finding returned by the three courts below.
Moreover, it would be relevant to state that despite time having been granted, original allotment made in favour of the petitioner has not been produced by his counsel, who has also absented himself.
Under the circumstances and since there is not an iota of evidence to show that any allotment had been made by the Gaon Sabha in favour of the petitioner, his case has no legs to stand on. The orders impugned and perfectly justified and call for no interference.
Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed with costs of Rs.10,000/-.
The costs be deposited within a period of 30 days, failing which, the amount shall be recovered as arrears of land revenue from the petitioner.
Order Date :- 22.2.2019 Jitendra