High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Lokesh Kumar & Others v. Dy. Director Of Consolidation,Saharanpur & Others - WRIT - B No. 73298 of 2005  RD-AH 6718 (1 December 2005)
Court no. 40
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 73298 of 2005
Lokesh Kumar and others.............................Petitioners.
Deputy Director consolidation Saharanpur and others........................................................Respondents.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and also learned counsel appearing for caveator and also perused the record.
From a perusal of record, it transpires that a chak road was carved out taking certain land from chak holder Nos. 1007, 250 A, 247 A, 1717 etc. for provision of chak road from Safla Khatri connecting to Deoband Main Road. In this connection petitioner's plot bearing no. 2052/2 situated towards eastern side was also requisitioned for the purpose and instead he was allotted land in lieu thereof after pegging it valuation at Rs.90 paise. It is further clear from the order of the Consolidation officer that father of the petitioner who was then tenure holder had accorded consent in this regard. It is also noteworthy that both Consolidation Officer and Settlement Officer Consolidation have concurrently held that construction of chak road is necessary or else all the chaks holders would not be able to have access to main Deoband Road. The Deputy Director consolidation agreeing to the concurrent finding of both the authorities below dismissed the revision.
Learned counsel for the petitioner urged that construction of a chak road which passes from middle of his plots has split up his plots nos. 2052 and 2053. He further urged that other chak roads are also there and construction of this chak road is not at all necessary.
From a perusal of the record it transpires that all the authorities below have recorded a concurrent finding that this chak road is quite necessary to provide approach road to the main Deoband Road. It is also worthy of notice that the order in question was passed in the year1998 and it is also eloquent from the order of Consolidation officer that it was passed with the consent of the petitioner's father. The appeal to the said order has been filed after an efflux of about 6 years. There is no indicium on record to suggest that father of the petitioner had not accorded consent at the time when he was alive. After his death petitioner challenged the construction of chak road. Since father of the petitioner did not choose to challenge the finding of the consolidation authorities, his consent would be taken to be implied inasmuch as no evidence was adduced on behalf of other side that this finding is perverse. Yet another aspect to be noticed is that from a perusal of the record, it is established that chak road is not passing through middle of the two plots of the petitioner i.e. plot nos. 2052 and 2053.
In the above perspective, I am of the view that provision for chak road was in accordance with law and consistent with the provisions of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act and there is no error apparent in the impugned order.
As a result, the writ petition fails and is dismissed in limine.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.