Allahabad High Court
Laxman & Ors. vs Deputy Director Of Consolidation Gonda ... on 8 July, 2010
Court No. - 19 Case :- CONSOLIDATION No. - 453 of 2010 Petitioner :- Laxman & Ors. Respondent :- Deputy Director Of Consolidation Gonda & Ors. Petitioner Counsel :- Anoop Kumar Upadhyaya Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,Ved Prakash Shukla Hon'ble S.C. Chaurasia,J.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Ved Prakash Shukla, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 3, learned Standing Counsel and perused the record.
This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed with the prayer that a writ, order of direction in the nature of certiorari may be issued quashing the impugned order dated 25-06-2010 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Gonda and the order dated 20-03-2009 passed by the Consolidation Officer Ramapur, Gonda, contained as Annexure Nos. 1 & 2 to the writ petition.
The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the opposite parties nos. 3 & 4 by concealing true facts and practising fraud on the court, without impleading the petitioners in the case, have obtained the impugned order dated 20-03-2009 illegally and feeling aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners preferred the revision in the court of Deputy Director of Consolidation, Gonda. His contention is that the revisional court has committed illegality in declining to record any finding on merits of the case and directing the petitioners/revisionists to prefer an appeal against the impugned order dated 20-03-2009 and disposing of the revision accordingly. His contention is that the petitioners are the nephews of the deceased Devta Din and Jagpata is not the widow of the deceased & she had no right to execute the sale deed dated 23-11-2002 in favour of Krishna Dev Tewari in respect of her alleged 1/2 share.
Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 3 has submitted that an appeal is pending against the order dated 17-06-2003 passed by the Consolidation Officer relating to mutation proceedings and the petitioners are the respondents in the said appeal and they can put up their case before the appellate court. He has further submitted that the learned revisional court has not recorded any finding on merits and has merely directed the petitioners to prefer an appeal against the impugned order dated 20-03-2009 and hence, there is no valid or sufficient ground to interfere in the said order.
From the perusal of the record, it transpires that the appeal against the order dated 17-06-2003 relating to mutation proceedings is pending and the petitioners are the respondents in the said appeal and on account of it, the revisional court has declined to record any finding on merits in order to avoid contradictory judgments and has directed the petitioners to prefer an appeal against the impugned order dated 20-03-2009.
The factual matters cannot be determined in the present writ petition. Since the revisional court has not recorded any finding on merits against the petitioners and has directed them to prefer an appeal against the impugned order dated 20-03-2009, I do not find any valid or sufficient ground to interfere in the said order in exercise of writ jurisdiction by this court.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners intend to file an appeal in compliance with the impugned order dated 25-06-2010 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation,Gonda and in the meantime, some protection may be granted by this court so that the opposite parties nos. 3 & 4 may not transfer the land in dispute to any third party and the status-quo may be maintained.
The petitioners may, if so advised, prefer an appeal in compliance with the impugned order dated 25-06-2010 within a period of one month from today.
For the period of one month, the status-quo as exists today shall be maintained and the opposite parties nos. 3 & 4 would not transfer the disputed land in any manner to any third party.
If the application for Interim Relief is moved by the petitioners, the same shall be disposed of expeditiously.
With these observations/directions, the writ petition stands disposed of finally.
Order Date :- 8.7.2010 AKS