Ravi vs Deputy Director of Consolidation, Bulandshahr and others

Rajes Kumar, J.—Heard Sri Rajesh Chandra Gupta, learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appears on behalf of respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3, Sri Ayub Khan appears on behalf of respondent No. 4 and Sri V.K. Singh appears, on behalf of respondent No. 5.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Bulandshahr vide order dated 23.8.2008 has allowed the revision of the respondent No. 4 without dealing with the case of the petitioner and without considering the findings recorded by the Consolidation Officer and the Settlement Officer of Consolidation.

Sri Ayub Khan, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 4 submitted that the Settlement Officer, of Consolidation while allowing the appeal of the petitioner has not considered the findings of the Consolidation Officer and the case of respondent No. 4. He submitted that on the facts and circumstances, it would be appropriate that the matter may be remanded back to the Settlement Officer of Consolidation to decide the appeal afresh after considering the objection, finding recorded by the Consolidation Officer, the case of the petitioner and the respondent No. 4 in accordance to law.

Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties, I have perused the impugned order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 23.8.2008.

In the said order, the reasoning given by the Consolidation Officer, Settlement Officer of Consolidation and the case of the petitioner has not been considered. In the impugned order the submission of the respondent has only been discussed and the revision has been allowed. This practice of the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Bulandshahr is not appreciable.

I have also perused the order of the Settlement Officer of Consolidation, Bulandshahr. The Settlement Officer of Consolidation, Bulandshahr while allowing the appeal of the petitioner has also not considered the findings recorded by the Consolidation Officer and the case of the respondent.

In this view of the matter, the order dated 23.8.2008 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Bulandshahr and order dated 17.5.2008 passed by the Settlement Officer of Consolidation, Bulandshahr cannot be sustained.

In the result, the writ petition is allowed. The order dated 23.8.2008 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Bulandshahr and order dated 17.5.2008 passed by the Settlement Officer of Consolidation, Bulandshahr are set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Settlement Officer of Consolidation, Bulandshahr to decide the appeal No. 884/20072008 afresh after considering the case of both the sides and findings recorded by the Consolidation Officer, Utarawali, Bulandshahr by a speaking and reasoned order. Petitioner may file certified copy of this order before the Settlement Officer of Consolidation, Bulandshahr within a period of one week and he is directed to decide the appeal after giving opportunity of hearing to all concerned parties within another period of two months in the light of the observations made above.