Court No. - 11
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 54334 of 2005
Petitioner :- Nathi Ram & Others
Respondent :- D.D.C. & Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Manu Saxena,Arjun Singhal,Rajesh Shukla,Rohit Kumar Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Nipun Singh,V.S. Dwivedi AND
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 54907 of 2005
Petitioner :- Smt. Brahmo Devi
Respondent :- D.D.C. Mujaffarnagar And Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- A.K. Rai,B.S.Yadav,S.N. Singh,Santosh Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Anuj Kumar,Nipun Singh,Rajesh Shukla,Rohit Kumar Singh,V.S. Dwivedi
Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai,J.
1. Both the writ petitions i.e. Writ-B No. 54334 of 2005 and Writ-B No. 54907 of 2005 have been filed against the same order dated 14.3.2005 passed by respondent No. 2- Settlement Officer of Consolidation, Muzaffarnagar (hereinafter referred to as, 'S.O.C.') as well as order dated 18.7.2005 passed by respondent No. 1-Deputy Director of Consolidation, Muzaffarnagar (hereinafter referred to as, 'D.D.C.'), and hence have been heard together.
2. The petitioners in both the writ petitions are co-tenure holders of Plot No. 11899 and 11900. Vakil Jung who is respondent No. 5 in Writ Petition No. 54332 of 2005 and respondent No. 3 in Writ Petition No. 54907 of 2005 is a purchaser of Plot Nos. 11889 and 11890. Plot Nos. 11899 and 11900 are adjacent to Highway connecting Kairana- Panipat. During the consolidation proceedings held in the village, the petitioners were denied Chak on their aforesaid original holdings by the S.O.C. Infact the S.O.C. vide his order dated 14.3.2005 allotted Chaks to Vakil Jung on Plot Nos. 11899 and 11900. The plots that were purchased by Vakil Jung were not adjacent to road. The aforesaid order dated 14.3.2005 was passed by the S.O.C. in Appeal No. 484/9 and 1226. Against the order dated 14.3.2005 passed by the S.O.C., petitioners filed Revisions before the D.D.C.
which were registered and numbered as Revision Nos. 1430 and 1437. The aforesaid revisions were dismissed by the D.D.C. vide his impugned order dated 18.7.2005 whereby he rejected the demand of the petitioners to be allotted Chak on Plot Nos. 11899 and 11900 which were adjacent to road and the original holdings of the petitioners.
3. A perusal of the order dated 18.7.2005 passed by the D.D.C. shows that in his aforesaid order, the D.D.C. has not considered the fact that in view of Circular U.P. No. C-37/G- 452/81 dated 1.5.1981, issued by Consolidation Commissioner, U.P. (referred in the judgement of this Court reported in Parsadi Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation, Lucknow and others, 2014 (124) RD 496) road side land of commercial value should be chucked out from the consolidation proceedings and, thus in case the said lands are not so chucked out, the tenure holder should be allotted a Chak on his original holding adjacent to the road. The orders dated 14.3.2005 and 18.7.2005 passed by S.O.C. and D.D.C. are contrary to law in view of the judgements of this Court reported in Parsadi (Supra), Jaswant Singh Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation, Banda and Others, 2006 (101) RD 207 and Munni Vs. D.D.C. and another, 2014 (123) RD 36.
4. In the circumstances, the orders dated 14.3.2005 and 18.7.2005 passed by S.O.C. and D.D.C. are hereby quashed. The writ petition is allowed. The matter is remanded back to respondent No. 2-S.O.C. to pass fresh orders in Appeal Nos. 484/9 and 1226 after giving due opportunity of hearing to the concerned parties within a period of four months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him.
Order Date :- 31.5.2018 Anurag/-