The writ petition challenging an order abolishing an allotted uran chak and restoring original holdings for agricultural balance was dismissed. The court held that correcting a patent illegality served substantial justice. Peer: 1051 of 2020
The writ petition challenging the revisional order was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 9
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 1051 of 2020
Petitioner :- Mishri Lal
Respondent :- Deputy Director Of Consolidation And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Arun Kumar Singh,Prabhakar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shivajee Singh Sisodiya
Hon'ble Anjani Kumar Mishra,J.
Supplementary affidavit by the petitioner is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Shivajee Singh Sisodiya, learned counsel for the caveator and learned Standing Counsel.
The instant writ petition arises out of proceedings for allotment of chaks and seeks a writ or certiorari for quashing the order dated 16.01.2020 passed by Deputy Director of Consolidation in a revision filed by the contesting opposite party.
By this order, the revision of the contesting respondent has been allowed.
Assailing the order impugned, contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the objection filed by the contesting respondents was allowed by the Consolidation Officer. Still not satisfied, he filed an appeal which was rejected. It is stated that a new case was setup at the revisional stage which has been accepted by the revisional court. The order is, therefore, illegal and is liable to be set aside.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondents has supported the impugned order.
I have considered the submission made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
Such perusal reveals that the petitioner had been allotted an udan Chak of Plot Nos.135 M and 136 M. These plots belong to the contesting respondents. The revisional court has abolished this udan chak allotted to the petitioner and in lieu allotted a chak to him on his original holdings namely plot nos.283, 284 & 285 etc.
This approach is perfectly justified as no chak holder is liable to be allotted a wholly uran chak. The D.D.C. has corrected a patent illegality committed by allotting an uran chak to the
petitioner, thereby doing substantial justice between the parties.
Under these circumstances, in my considered opinion and since substantial justice has been done between the parties, no interference is called for, in the impugned revisional order.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 14.10.2020 Shivangi
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court interfered with the revisional order abolishing an allotted uran chak and granting the original holdings to the petitioner.
Whether the correction of a patent illegality in land consolidation proceedings warrants quashing the revised order.
Mishri Lal
Deputy Director Of Consolidation
3 Others
Anjani Kumar Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
