Court No. - 9
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 5823 of 2018 Petitioner :- Pritpal Singh Grewal And 2 Others Respondent :- Deputy Director Of Consolidation And 11 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kulveer Singh,Santosh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Anoop Singh,Ashok Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Anjani Kumar Mishra,J.
Heard counsel for the petitioner as also counsel for the caveator-respondents.
The instant writ petition is directed against an order dated 29.11.2018 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation on a revision filed by the respondents.
The Deputy Director of Consolidation by the order impugned, has allowed the revision, set aside the order dated 16.08.2018 and remanded the matter back to the Consolidation Officer for passing a fresh order after issuing notice to the parties and after hearing them.
It appears that in an objection under Section 9A(2) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, an application under Section 340 read with Section 195 Cr.P.C. and another application under Section 35 CPC was filed by the petitioners.
These applications were rejected by the Consolidation Officer referring to the merits of the objection pending before him.
The Deputy Director of Consolidation has set aside this order on the reasoning that in case the merits of the objection were being touched while dealing with the application under Section 340 read with Section 195 Cr.P.C. and the application under Section 35 CPC, the applications should have been decided along with the objection itself. Accordingly, the order dated 16.08.2018 has been set aside and the matter has been remanded back for fresh consideration and or decision along with the main case itself.
Since the order impugned is an order of remand, this Court does not consider it expedient to interfere because in any case, the petitioners still have every opportunity of canvassing their claim before the Consolidation Officer, where the matter stands remanded. Moreover, the order impugned is manifestly in favour of the petitioners as it was their application which was rejected by the Consolidation Officer and these very applications stand remanded back of a fresh decision therein.
For the same reason, the writ petition is found to be misconceived and is dismissed.
Order Date :- 19.12.2018 Mayank