Court No. - 45
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 1826 of 1993 Petitioner :- Panna Lal Respondent :- D.D.C.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Niwas Singh,V.K. Chandel Counsel for Respondent :- S.C.
Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. The present writ petition has been filed against the order dated 23.9.1992 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Varanasi, i.e., respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as, 'D.D.C.') in Revision Nos. 593 and 588, whereby the D.D.C. has dismissed the revisions filed by the petitioner.
3. It appears from the records that the petitioner was claiming that Plot No. 433 be either declared 'achak' or petitioner should be allotted a chak equal to his share on the said plot. A reading of the order dated 23.9.1992 shows that the claim of the petitioner to declare Plot No. 433 as 'achak' was rejected by the D.D.C. on the ground that the tenure holders had already been delivered possession after allotment of chaks to them and therefore the plot cannot be declared 'achak' at this stage. There is no illegality or perversity in the opinion recorded by the D.D.C. Further, a reading of the orders dated 23.9.1992 and 4.1.1991 passed by the D.D.C. and 15.3.1990 passed by the Settlement Officer, Varanasi shows that the tenure holders had already been granted a chak according to their share in Plot No. 433, and therefore, it was not possible to include more area in the chak allotted to the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to show any perversity in the concurrent orders passed by the consolidation authorities. The writ petition lacks merit, and is, accordingly dismissed.
5. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
Order Date :- 26.4.2019 Anurag/-