Allahabad High Court
Nathuni And Others vs Dy. Director Of Consolidation Deoria ... on 15 September, 2023
Author: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
Bench: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:178830 Court No. - 48 Case :- WRIT - B No. - 60387 of 2007 Petitioner :- Nathuni And Others Respondent :- Dy. Director Of Consolidation Deoria And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- K.K. Mani Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Adya Prasad Tiwari,B.B.P.Srivastava,D.N. Yadav,S. Kumar,S.K.Dwivedi Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
Order on Amendment Application No. 39 of 2023
1. Heard.
2. Allowed.
3. Since legal heirs of petitioner-1 are already on record, therefore, words ?since deceased? be mentioned ahead of the name of petitioner-1.
4. Necessary correction be carried out during course of the day.
Order on Memo of Petition
1. Heard Sri K.K. Mani, learned counsel for petitioners and Sri A.K. Rai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for State-Respondents. None appeared on behalf of contesting-respondents.
2. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that claim of petitioners on the basis of an unregistered family settlement was accepted by Consolidation Officer after considering oral as well as documentary evidence by a detailed and reasoned order dated 03.05.1994. For reference following part of order passed by Consolidation Officer is mentioned hereinafter:
?1- ???? ?????? ??? ????????? ??? ?????? ???????? ?? ???????? ???? ?????? ??? ??? ?? ???? ???????
2- ???? ????????? ?????? ?????? 12.07.72 ?? ???? ?? ??????? ???? ?? ????? ????? ??????? ???? ????? ????? ????? ?? ?? ???? ??? ?????? ?? ????? ?? ????????? ?? ??? ???? ?????? ?? ??? ???? ???? ???
???? ???????? ?? ?????? ???? ??? ??????? ?????????? ?? ??? ???? ????????? ?? ??? ?? ?????????????? 08.08.88 ????? ???? ??? ?? ????????? ?? ????? ?? ???? ??? ?? ??? ?????? ?? ???? ?????? ??? ???? ?? ???? ????? ??? ????? ?? ??? ?? ????? ????????? ?????? ?????? 12.07.72 ????? ???? ??? ?? ??? ????? ??? ?????? ?? ??? ?? ????? ????? ??? ??? ????????? ??? ?? ??? ?? ?? ??? ????? ?? ??? ????????? ??? ?? ?? ?? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ??? ??, ???????? ?? ????? ???? ?? ?? ???? ?? ?? ????? ?? ?? ????????? ??? ???? ???????? ?? ?????? ?? ??? ???? ??? ?? ????????? ?????? ?????? 12.07.72 ?? ??????? ?? ??? ????? ??? ?? ?? ??? ???? ?? ?????? ?? ????? ??? ?? ?? ????????? ?????? ???? ?? ???? ???? ?? ????? ?? ??? ?????? ??? ??? ???? ?? ????? ?? ??? ?? ?? ??? ??? ?? ?? ??????? ???? 987/.17 ??? 18 - ??? ???? ??? ?????? ??? ??????? ?? ?? ??? 8- ??? ????????? ??????? ?????? 12.07.72 ?? ?????? ???? ?? ?? ????? ?? ????????? ?????? ?? ??? 987/8 ?? ???? ????? ??? ???? ??? ???????? ?? ??? ?????? ???? ?? ??? ?? ??????? ?????? ????????? ??? ?? ?? ?? ?? ???? ???? ?????? ?? ??? ????? ?? ??? ?? ?? ??? ?? ??? ?? ?? ???????? ?????? ?? ?????? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ???? ?? ???????? ?? ???? ??? ???? ????????? ?? ???? ???? ?? ??? ???? ?????? ?????? ? ???? ?? ???? ???? ?? ?? ??? ?? ?? 2000/- ???? ???? ?????????? ?? ????? ???? ??? ?? ?? ???? ???? ?? ????? ?? ????? ?? ?????? ???? ?????? ??? ????? ?? ???? ?? ?????????? ?? ????? ????? ???? ??????? ???? ??? ?? ????? ????? ?? ????? ? ?? ?????? ?? ???? ???? ??? ?? ? ?????????? ?? ????? ?? ???? ??? ?????? ?????? 08.08.1988 ????? ??????? ?? ??? ???? ??? ?????? ?????????? ???? ?? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ?????? ????????? ?????? ?????? 12.07.72 ?? ?????? ????? 987/.8 ??? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ????? ???? ?? ????????? ?????? ?????? 12.07.72 ?? ???????? ?????? ?? ???? ?? ??????? ???? ???? ?? ?? ??????? ???????? ?? ???? ????????? ????????? ? ?????? ????? ??? ??? ?? ?????? ???? ?? ?? ????????? ????????? ?? ???????? ?? ???? ????? ????? ?? ?????? ???????? ?? ???? ???? ?? ?????? ?????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ?? ????????? ?? ????????? ??? ????????? ?????? ?? ???? ??? ?? ???? ??? ?????? ?? ???????? ?? ???? ??? ????? ?? ?? ?? ????????? ?????? ?? ??? ????? ??? ????? ????????? ?????? ?????? 12.07.72 ?? ??????? ?? ??????? ?? ????????? ?? ?????? ? ???? ?????? ?? ?????? ???? ??? ?? ?? ??? ??????? ??????? ?? ????? ?? ???? ?? ??????? ??????? ?? ??? ??? ?? ???? ?? ?????? ????? ??????? ?? ????? ?? ???? ??? ?? ????????? ?? ?? ?? ????? ?? ??????? ??? ????? ???? ???? ?? ????? ?? ???? ????? ???? ????? ???? ?? ????????? ?? ?????? ?????? ?? ????? ?????? ??? ?????? ? ???????? ??? ???? ?? ???? ??? ?? ?????? ??????? ?? ????????? ?? ????? ? ?????? ?? ???? ????????? ??? ?????? ????? ???? ?? ???? ??? ????????? ?????? ?????? 12.07.72 ?? ?????? ????? ?????? 987/.8 ????? ?? ???? ????? ???? ???? ?? ???? ???? ???? ?? ???????? ?? ?????? ???? ???? ???? ?????? 702/.8 ??? ???? ??? ??? ??? ?????? ????????? ?? ???? 12.11.90 ?? ???? ???? ?????? ?????? 16.06.90 ?? ??? ???? ?? ???? ?????? 24.07.90 ?? ??? ?? ??? ?????? ?? ????? ???? ???? ?? ??? ?? ?? ???????? ?? ???? ?? ?? ??? ???? ???? ??? ??????? ???? ???? ??????, ???? ?? ???? ???? ?? ?? ??? ???? ?? ?????? ?? ???? ???? ?? ??? ?? ?? ????? ?? ?????? ?? ????? ? ???? ?? ???? ??? ??? ?????? ??? ????? ?? ?????? ????? ?? ??? ?? ??? ??? ???? .17 ??? ?? ???? ??? ? ????? ?? ???? ???? ????? ???? ??? ??? ???????? ?? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ???? ?? ???? ???? ???? ?? ??? ?? ?? ????? ???? ???? ????? ?? ?? ?? ???? ??? ?? ???? ?????? ????? ?? ?? ??? ??????? ???? ???? ??? ?? ???? ??? ?? ?? ???? ?? ????? ?? ????? ?? ?? ????? ?? ????????? ?? ???? ????? ?? ???? ?? ??? ???? ???
??? ???? ??? ?? ?????? ??? ?????? ???? ???? ??? 987/ ?????? ???? ???? ?? ????? ??? 987/.8 ??? ?? ???????? ????? ?????? ?? ??? ????? ???? ????? ????? ??? ???? ?? ??? ???? ?????? ???? ???? ???? ???????? ??? ??? ????? ????? ???? ???"
3. Learned counsel for petitioners further submits that contesting-respondents have preferred appeal against aforesaid order. However, by a very cryptic and unreasoned order dated 14.07.1995 Settlement Officer of Consolidation has allowed appeal and reasons given therein are referred hereinafter:
"??? ????? ?? ??????? ???????? ?? ????? ?? ????? ??? ??????? ???????? ?? ???????? ??? ?? ?? ?????? ???????? ?? ??????? ?? ?? ?? ???????? ?? ?????? ??? ?? ?????? 12.07.72 ?? ????????? ?????? ??? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?? ???????? ???? ?? ???? ?????? ??????? ?? ?????? ??? ??? ??? ?????? ?? ????????? ?????? ???? ?? ???? ?? ??????????? ?? ??? ??? ??????? ?? ????? ???? ???? ????????? ??? ??????? ??????? ??????? ?????? ????? ???? ??????????? ?? ????? ??? ???? ?? ??? ?????? ??? ?? ?????? ??? ???? ????? ??? ?? ?????? ???? ??????? ??? ???? ????? ???"
4. Learned counsel further submits that revision filed by petitioners against appellate order was also rejected in a cryptic manner without considering that Appellate Authority has interfered with a reasoned order passed by Consolidation Officer in a very cursory manner. The reasons given by Revisional Authority are reproduced hereinafter:
"??? ?????? ?? ??????? ?????????? ?????? ???????? ?????? ?? ????? ???? ??? ??????? ???????? ?? ????????, ?????? ???????? ?? ???????? ? ??????? ??????? ???????? ?? ??? ???????? ?? ?????? ?????? ?????? ???? ?? ??????? ??????? ??????? ?? ???? ?? ?? ?? ???????? ?? ????? ??? ?? ?????? ???????? ?????? ???? ?????? 14.07.95 ???????? ?? ?????? ????????? ??? ??? ??? ?? ???? ?? ????? ???? ??? ?? ?? ???? ??? ????? ???? ?? ????? ???? ?????? ?? ????????? ?? ???????? ???? ?? ??? ??????? ??????? ??? ????? ???? ?? ???? ?????? ???? ????? ???"
5. Sri A.K. Rai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for State-Respondents, has not disputed above referred submissions on the basis of available record.
6. I have carefully perused the record as well as above referred reasons given by Consolidation Officer, Settlement Officer of Consolidation and Deputy Director of Consolidation and find substance that the reasons given by Consolidation Officer were interfered in a very cryptic manner by Appellate Authority and it was upheld by Revisional Authority also in a cryptic manner. In case Appellate Authority has to set aside an order passed by Consolidation Officer, it has to be accompanied by proper and legally permissible reasons. However, as apparent from above quoted part of impugned orders, such exercise was not appears to be undertaken by Appellate as well as Revisional Authorities.
7. In view of above, the writ petition is allowed. Impugned orders dated 14.07.1995 and 23.11.2007 are hereby set aside. Since none appeared on behalf of contesting-respondents, therefore, in the interest of justice, matter is remanded back to Appellate Authority to decide appeal filed by petitioners afresh on merit within a period of six months from today, if there is no legal impediment.
8. Since counsel for contesting-respondents is not present, therefore, Appellate Authority will issue notice to them while deciding appeal afresh.
Order Date :- 15.9.2023 AK