Court No. - 17
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 4865 of 2018 Petitioner :- Shyam Bhushan And 4 Others Respondent :- Deputy Director Of Consolidation And 71 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sushma Devi,Daya Shankar Prasad Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pankaj Roy
Hon'ble Rajiv Joshi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Pankaj Roy, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2 and 3.
This writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 17.05.2018 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Varanasi in Revision No. 1376 of 2017, whereby the delay has been condoned by the Deputy Director of Consolidation in revision filed by respondent nos. 2 and 3.
The record reflects that certain objections filed under Section 9A (2) of the U.P.C.H. Act, 1953, were decided by the Consolidation Officer dated 17.5.1982. Against the said order, several persons filed the appeal, which was decided by the Settlement Officer Consolidation vide order dated 30.10.2000 but the appeal has not been filed by respondent nos. 2 and 3 although they were respondents in the appeal filed by the other villagers. Against that order some persons filed revision, which is pending.
During the pendency of the said revision, respondent nos.
2 and 3 also filed revision challenging both the orders passed by the Consolidation Officer dated 17.5.1982 as well as the order dated 30.10.2000 passed by Settlement Officer Consolidation. The delay condonation application was contested by the petitioners on the ground that revision filed by respondent nos. 2 and 3 is highly time barred and no proper explanation has been given in order to condone the delay.
The Deputy Director of Consolidation considered all the aspects of the matter and recorded specific finding to the effect that respondent nos. 2 and 3 were parties before the revisional authority and they were not served. As per the record, it is further admitted that both the respondent nos. 2 and 3 are the permanent resident of district Mirzapur and recorded that there is sufficient cause for condonation of delay as the orders impugned were not in their knowledge.
The finding recorded by the Deputy Director of Consolidation condoning the delay is the finding of fact and no prejudice has been caused to the petitioners even the revision filed by the other villagers is also pending in which petitioners have been arrayed as respondents.
Writ petition is devoid of merits and is, accordingly, dismissed.
Since, the matter is old one and therefore, the Deputy Director of Consolidation is directed to decide the revision after considering all the points raised by learned counsel for the petitioners including maintainability of the revision filed by respondent nos. 2 and 3 in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 23.8.2018 Noman