Allahabad High Court
Ram Prakash And Another vs Settlement Officer Of Consolidation ... on 31 August, 2020
Author: Alok Mathur
Bench: Alok Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?In Chamber Case :- CONSOLIDATION No. - 13944 of 2020 Petitioner :- Ram Prakash And Another Respondent :- Settlement Officer Of Consolidation Iind Barabanki And Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Narendra Kumar Kashyap,Neha Dhanwani Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
Heard Sri Narendra Kumar Kashyap, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State respondents through video conferencing in view of COVID-19 pandemic.
The instant petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned judgment and order dated 06.03.2020, passed by the Settlement Officer of Consolidation, Barabanki, whereby Case No. 17/75/19-20, filed under Rule 109A of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Rules, 1954, pending before the Consolidation Officer, Sadar, Barabanki, has been summoned/recalled. Further prayer has been made to issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Consolidation Officer, Sadar, Barabanki to decide the application filed by the petitioners under Rule 109A of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Rules, 1954, expeditiously.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that they purchased land of Gata Nos. 1487 and 1489, area 0.407 and 1.265 hectares respectively from one Abdulla Hussain - respondent no. 4 by means of registered sale deed for consideration of Rs.4,66,000/-. Names of the petitioners were mutated in the revenue records vide order dated 10.07.2000, passed by the Naib Tehsildar, Haidergarh, Barabanki. The property in question was handed over to the petitioners by means of order dated 08.09.2000, passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Haidergarh, Barabanki and since then the petitioners are in possession over the property in question.
Counsel for the petitioners further submits that in the year 2007, in respect of the property in question certain dispute arose between respondent no. 4 and his brother respondent no. 3 and certain orders were passed in the case being contested by them.
In the interregnum period, the litigation between the petitioners, respondent no. 4 and respondent no. 4 took place. Finally, the petitioners moved an application under Rule 109A of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Rules, 1954 on 14.09.2019, for mutation of their names in the revenue record.
After arguing the matter up to some length, learned counsel for the petitioners prays that direction may be issued to the Settlement Officer Consolidation, Barabanki to decide petitioners application under Rule 109A of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Rules, 1954, expeditiously.
Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has no objection in case suitable directions are issued to the authority concerned for deciding the application filed by them.
In view of above, the respondent no. 2 - Consolidation Officer, Sadar, Barabanki is directed to consider and decide the petitioners application filed under Rule 109A of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Rules, 1954, for mutation of their names in respect to the property in question, expeditiously, say within a period of one month from the date of production of certified copy of this order, by means of speaking and reasoned order, in accordance with law, after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned.
With above directions the petition stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 31.8.2020 A. Verma (Alok Mathur, J.)