ORDER S.N. Srivastava, J.
1. Dispute relates to property of Sharda Nand. Against entry made by Consolidator in records mentioning Smt. Poonam Devi as heir of Sharda Nand, petitioner approached Deputy Director of Consolidation by filing revision which was dismissed by Deputy Director of Consolidation on the ground of alternative remedy that if she was aggrieved by entry made by Consolidator she may approach Consolidation Officer and then Settlement Officer of Consolidation. Deputy Director of Consolidation held revision preferred before Deputy Director of Consolidation as not maintainable.
2. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned standing counsel.
3. Learned counsel for petitioner urged that in view of the latest amendment in Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings (Second Amendment) Ordinance, 2002 by which Explanation (3) was added and by virtue of which now power to examine any findings, whether of fact or law, recorded by any subordinate authority, and which also includes the power to re-appreciate any oral or documentary evidence vests with the Deputy Director of Consolidation. He further urged that Deputy Director of Consolidation was erred in law in not appreciating materials on record and its order dismissing revision was passed without considering petitioner's case on merits.
4. After considering materials on record and arguments made by learned counsel for petitioner, I am of the view that order passed by Deputy Director of Consolidation does not suffer from any error of law,
5. For the purposes of deciding present controversy Section 12 of U. P. C. H. Act is relevant which is being quoted below for ready reference :
Section 12 of U. P. C. H. Act :
"12. Decision of matters relating to changes and transactions affecting rights or interests recorded in revised records.--(1) All matters relating to changes and transfers affecting any of the rights or interests recorded in the revised records published under Sub-section (1) of Section 10 for which a cause of action had not arisen when proceedings under Sections 7 to 9 were started or were in progress, may be raised before the Assistant Consolidation Officer as and when they arise, but not later than the date of notification under, Section 52 or under Sub-section (1) of Section 6.
(2) The provisions of Sections 7 to 11 shall mutatis mutandis, apply to the hearing and decision of any matter raised under Sub-section (1) as if it were a matter raised under the aforesaid sections."
6. The orders passed in proceeding under Section 12 of U.P.C.H. Act are proceedings affecting change of rights and interests in revenue record and are also title proceedings. Provisions of Sections 7 to 11 of U.P.C.H. Act are also applicable to these proceedings.
7. Admittedly, land in dispute was recorded in the name of Sharda Nand in the final records prepared under Section 10 of the U.P.C.H. Act and an entry was made by the Consolidator in favour of opposite party No. 2, which according to petitioner was illegal and without any authority of law. In case there was any wrong relating to any change of rights or interests in revenue records, petitioner may file objections before the Consolidation Officer and adduce evidence in support of her pleadings. Admittedly in the present case no oral or documentary evidence was adduced by parties before the authority competent to deal with these disputes. Revision preferred by petitioner was rightly dismissed by Deputy Director of Consolidation on the ground of alternative remedy. It is still open to the petitioner to file objection under Section 12 of U.P.C.H. Act before Consolidation Officer.
8. So far as other argument made by learned counsel for petitioner is concerned, Explanation (3) in Section 48 of U.P.C.H. Act will not help petitioner in support of her claim. Explanation (3) is being quoted below for ready reference ;
2. Insertion of Section 48 of U.P. Act No. 5 of 1954.--In Section 48 of the Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953, after Explanation (2) the following Explanation shall be inserted :
"Explanation (3).--The power under this section to examine the correctness, legality or propriety of any order includes the power to examine any findings, whether of fact or law, recorded by any subordinate authority, and also includes the power to re-appreciate any oral or documentary evidence."
9. Petitioner is claiming rights on the basis of being sister of Sharda Nand. She pleads that Smt. Poonam Devi remarried and cannot inherit property of Sharda Nand after remarriage. All these questions are questions of facts. Unless Consolidation Officer or appellate authority considers, appreciates and decides the matter on the basis of materials produced by the parties in support of their respective claims, question to re-appreciate oral or documentary evidence by Deputy Director of Consolidation does not arise.
10. Petition lacks merit and is dismissed. However, any observation made by the Deputy Director of Consolidation in the impugned order relating to merit of claim of parties shall not affect claim of the parties while deciding the case of the parties on merits by the Consolidation Officer after giving opportunity to complete pleadings, adduce evidence and of hearing to all concerned parties in accordance with law.