High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Rajendra Pprasad Singh v. D.D.C. - WRIT - B No. 13097 of 1981  RD-AH 8057 (30 April 2007)
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 13097 of 1981.
Rajendra Prasad Singh. Vs. Deputy Director Consolidation
Hon'ble Janardan Sahai, J.
This writ petition arises out of chak allotment proceedings. It is common ground between the counsel for the parties that the original holding of the petitioner is .69 acre and the original holding of the respondent no. 2 is 2.08 acres. At the stage of the Consolidation Officer the petitioner was allotted a chak measuring .91 acre. The Settlement Officer Consolidation modified the chak of the petitioner to one of 1.45 acres. The chak of the respondent no. 2 allotted at the stage of Settlement Officer Consolidation was of 1.97 acres. A revision was filed by the respondent no. 2 against the order of the Settlement Officer Consolidation. The grievance of the respondent no. 2 was that her chak was 'L' shape. The Deputy Director Consolidation modified the chak of the petitioner and of the respondent no. 2. The area of the petitioner's chak has been reduced. The order of the Deputy Director Consolidation has been challenged by the petitioner.
I have heard Sri M.N. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Veer Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2.
It was submitted by the petitioner's counsel that the same consideration, which weighed with the Deputy Director Consolidation for modifying the chak of the second respondent was also material in allotment of chak to the petitioner, in as much as the chak of the petitioner has also become deshaped. In the writ petition there is no averments to indicate that the chak of the petitioner as allotted by the Deputy Director Consolidation is irregular in shape. The justification for the reduction of the area of the petitioner's chak is that his original holding was .69 acre whereas the Settlement Officer Consolidation had allotted him 1.45 acres, which was a variation of more than 100% of the size of his original holding. Under Section 19 a variation of more than 25% is not permissible. The area now alloted by the Deputy Director Consolidation to the petitioner is about the same as the petitioner's original holding. As far as the shape of the petitioner's chak is concerned there is no averment in the writ petition to which counsel may have referred to indicate that it is irregular in shape. The grievance of the respondent no. 2 is that the chak allotted at the Settlement Officer Consolidation stage, which was for 1.97 acres was 'L' shape chak is not available to the petitioner whose chak allotted at the stage of the Deputy Director Consolidation is a smaller chak of about .75 acre and that although some of the plots of respondent no. 2 may have been taken out and allotted to the petitioner and vice versa but that would not mean that the chak of the petitioner is 'L' shape. The writ petition does not have any merit and is dismissed.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.