High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Santosh Kumar v. State Of U.P. Thru' Secretary Revenue Lucknow & Others - WRIT - B No. 43581 of 2006  RD-AH 13542 (17 August 2006)
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 43581 of 2006
Santosh Kumar ....................... Petitioner.
State of U.P. and others ............ Respondents.
Hon'ble Krishna Murari, J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri L.K. Tripathi, learned counsel for contesting respondent.
This petition arises out of proceedings under Section 9A(2) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act (for short ''the Act') initiated by the petitioner. The facts are that the petitioner filed an objection before the Consolidation Officer claiming rights over the land in dispute as adopted son of the deceased recorded tenure-holder. The Consolidation Officer vide order dated 13.11.1991 allowed the objection on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the parties. The said order was challenged by respondent no.3 who is claiming rights on the basis of natural succession. The Settlement Officer Consolidation vide order dated 1.3.2002 allowed the appeal. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed a revision which has been dismissed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation vide impugned order dated 17.6.2006.
Both the Settlement Officer Consolidation as well as Deputy Director of Consolidation have recorded a finding that another objection filed by the petitioners with regard to the same property seeking same relief which was numbered as 1039/1040 was already dismissed and as such the second objection was not maintainable.
Both the courts below have rightly held that second objection seeking same relief was not maintainable.
There is no illegality in the order impugned in the writ petition.
The writ petition accordingly, fails and is dismissed.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.