Court No. - 49
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 2562 of 2019 Petitioner :- Ram Nain Respondent :- Deputy Director Of Consolidation And 13 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Chandra Maurya Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3.
The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition challenging the order dated 24.7.2019 passed by Deputy Director of Consolidation, Gorakhpur/respondent No.1 passed in Revision No.890 filed under Section 48 of U.P. Consolation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, 1953).
It appears from perusal of record that an application was filed by one respondent No.4 namely Sagar son of Sudama before the Settlement Officer of Consolidation, Gorakhpur/respondent No.2 for impleadment of himself as party. The said application was allowed by the respondent No.2 vide its order dated 9.7.2019. Against the said order, a revision was filed by the petitioner before respondent No.1 and the same was rejected by the respondent No.1 vide order dated 24.7.2019. The petitioner has now challenged the order dated 24.7.2019 passed by respondent No.1 as well as order dated 9.7.2019 passed by respondent No.2 in the present writ petition.
It is argued by Ms. Praveen Shukla, learned Standing Counsel that order impugned dated 24.7.2019 passed by respondent No.1 is absolutely perfect and valid order. The respondent No.2 rightly allowed the application for impleadment filed by respondent No.4. It is settled law that against such kind of orders which are interlocatory in nature, revision under Section 48 of the Act, 1953 is not maintainable. No other arguments whatsoever has been raised by the counsel for the petitioner except the fact that the order impugned passed by the respondent No.1 is illegal.
In the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that no interference is called for in the present case by this Court specially under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
The writ petition lacks merit and the same is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Order Date :- 17.12.2019 saqlain