Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4. Respondent nos.2 to 5 preferred three separate revisions bearing Revision nos.257/2015-16 (Ram Prakash vs. Chavvi Nath), 256/2015-16 (Sanjeet Kumar Pal (Ranjeet Pal) vs. Chhavi Nath) and 258/2015-16 (Smt. Vindeshwari vs. Chhavi Nath) which were clubbed together and leading case was taken as Revision no.257/2015-16. The revisions were allowed on the sole ground that the petitioner is having private source of irrigation over Plot no.52 ignoring the fact that there is no private source of irrigation over Plot no.52 and that the petitioner on the basis of mutual partition had been in possession over Plot no.34, 35 and 36 since long time. It has been submitted that respondent no.1 altered the chak allotments made by the Settlement Officer Consolidation without making any on the spot inspection and without expressing any satisfaction as to the correctness, legality or propriety of the order passed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation. In fact, respondent no.1 far exceeded his jurisdiction as given under Section 48 of the Consolidation Of Holdings Act and without making any observation regarding correctness or otherwise of the order impugned in the revision has set aside the said order causing grave hardship to the petitioner as his original Plot nos.34, 35 and 36 have been handed over to the respondents on the ground that it is close to Nahar/Canal and the respondents shall enjoy the facility of irrigation from Canal whereas the petitioner shall enjoy the facility of irrigation from Tube-well situated near Plot no.52, a chak out land.