Court No. - 10
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 35852 of 2018 Petitioner :- Ram Pal And 21 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashok Gupta,Chandra Shekhar Agnihotri Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioners are before this Court with request to issue direction to the respondents for making measurement of the land allotted to them during the consolidation proceedings and handover the possession of the chaks to them.
Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the notification under Section 4 (2) of Consolidation of Holdings Act was issued by the consolidation authorities in the year 1993, whereby village Sandi Bangar, Tehsil Pailani, District Banda came into consolidation operation. In the consolidation proceedings, chaks were allotted to the petitioners as well as other villagers. After completion of consolidation proceedings, the authorities made a publication under Section 52 of the Consolidation of Holding Act on 19.10.2002 and khataunis were issued to the petitioners and other villagers. Inspite of several orders passed by the consolidation authorities, the measurement and transfer of the possession of the land in question has not taken place till date. In support of his submission, he has placed reliance on the order of this Court dated 11.9.2018 passed in Writ C No.27219 of 2018 (Shri Ram vs. State of UP and others), which was disposed of with following observations:-
"Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that after the notification under Section 52 of the U.P. consolidation of holdings Act the consolidation courts become functus officio and they cease to exist unless there are proceedings pending. In the instant case under section 27 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act the revenue authorities alone were required to look into the orders and thereafter, prepare the proper Revenue Records. Learned counsel relied upon 1989 RD 281 (Hari Ram Vs. D.D.C., Azamgarh) and to bolster his submission, read out a certain paragraph of the judgment which is being reproduced as under:-
"We find that on October 29, 1987 an objection was preferred by the petitioner before the Deputy Director of Consolidation. The position of law is well settled. The Deputy Director of Consolidation has no jurisdiction to exercise power under Section 48(3) of the Act if a de- notification has already taken place under Section 52 of the Act. The Deputy Director of Consolidation, therefore, will first record a finding as to whether a Notification under Section 52 of the Act had, in fact, been issued on February 13, 1982. If he finds that such a notification exists and if he also finds that the land which is the subject matter of dispute is covered by the said Notification, he shall desist from exercising any power under Section 48 (3) of the Act. With this direction the petition is disposed of finally."
Under such circumstances direction is being issued to the District Magistrate, Maharajganj who would after putting the affected parties to notice get the correction of the records done within one month."
Following the aforesaid order passed by this Court passed in Shri Ram's case, this writ petition is also disposed of finally with a direction to the respondent nos.4 and 5 to get measurement of the land in question done within three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order before him.
Order Date :- 29.10.2018 RKP