Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:20105 Court No. - 7 Case :- WRIT - B No. - 844 of 2024 Petitioner :- Anil Kumar And Others Respondent :- Consolidation Officer Bikapur And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Raghaw Ram Upadhyay Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Syed Mohd. Munis Jafari With Case :- WRIT - B No. - 9 of 2025 Petitioner :- Karuna Krishna And Others Respondent :- Deputy Director Of Consolidation, Ayodhya And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Raghaw Ram Upadhyay Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Syed Mohd. Munis Jafari Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. 1. Heard Shri Raghaw Ram Upadhyay, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Badrish Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the State- respondent and Shri Syed Mohd. Munis Jafari, learned counsel for respondent nos. 3, 9, 21 (respondent no.2 in WRIT - B No. 844 of 2024), 23, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 31, 33, 38, 40, 41 and 45 in WRIT - B No. 9 of 2025. 2. Office report as also affidavit of service dated 24.01.2025 as also copy of summons on record indicate that service upon all the private- respondents is sufficient. Relevant para of the affidavit is extracted herein-under :- "4. That in compliance of the Hon'ble Court's order the petitioners have taken step in the office this Hon'ble Court on 10.1.2025 and on the same date the Dasti Notices have been handed over to the petitioners (through counsel) and thereafter the deponent received the same from his counsel and submitted in the court of Settlement Officer Consolidation on 13.1.2025. 5. That on 13.1.2025, due to condolence, the notices could not be served upon the opposite parties and as such the concerned officials of the court of Settlement Officer Consolidation (Notice Server) served the notices to the aforesaid parties on 15.1.2025 and handed over the receiving to the deponent on 17.1.2025. The copies of the Mutfarrik bearing endorsement of receiving are collectively being annexed herewith as ANNEXURE NO. A-1 to this Affidavit." 3. In the aforesaid background of the case, this Court proceeded to disposed of both the petitions finally at the admission stage with the consent of learned counsel for the parties present today before this Court. 4. Petition i.e. WRIT - B No. 844 of 2024 has been filed seeking following main relief(s):- "(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 22.6.2024 passed by the Consolidation Officer, Bikapur, District- Ayodhya (the opposite party No. 1), as contained in Annexure No. 1 to this writ petition. (ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the opposite party No. 1 to expunge the entry of impugned order from the revenue records (if it has been entered over there) and maintain the earlier entries. (iii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the opposite party No. 2 not to interfere in right, title and possession of the petitioners over the land in dispute, in garb of the impugned order of opposite party No. 1." 5. Petition i.e. WRIT - B No. 9 of 2025 has been filed seeking following main relief(s):- "(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned judgment and orders dated 2.8.2024 and 18.1.2021 passed by the opposite party No. 1&2, as contained in Annexure No. 1&2 to this writ petition. (ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the opposite party No. 2 to reconsider the application for correction of order dated 29.12.2020 filed by the petitioners. (iii) issue a writ, order or direction in any nature which this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case." 6. Brief facts of the case which are brought to the notice of this Court from the above indicated petitions and which are relevant for the purposes of final disposal of these petitions are as under :- (i) Challenging the order dated 28.05.2019, inadvertently indicated as 25.05.2019 in the memo of appeal as also in the application seeking interim relief, passed by Consolidation Officer, Bikapur, Ayodhya (in short "CO") in Case No. 505/506, under 9A(2) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (in short "Act of 1953"), the appeal, registered as Appeal No. 1522, was filed by the petitioners. (ii) Considering the facts of the case including the date of the order passed by CO, inadvertently indicated in the memo of appeal as 25.05.2019, the Settlement Officer of Consolidation, Ayodhya (in short "SOC") passed the interim order on 13.06.2019, which reads as under :- " उभय पक कक ससनन अपपल ववचनरनधपन हह। अवर नयन० कक पतनवलप आहहत कक जनवव। पकक कक नकवटस जनरप हककर वद० 28/06/19 कक पसतसत हक। नयनयवहत मम अपपल कव वनसतनरण तक चकबनदप अधधकनरप कव आदवश वद० 25/5/19 कन वकयननवयन एवव पभनव सथवगत रहवगन।" . (iii) After the order dated 13.06.2019, considering the fact that in the memo of appeal as also in the application seeking interim relief the correct date of order of CO has not been mentioned and the same could not be corrected at the time of filing of appeal, an application seeking amendment was preferred on 13.06.2019 itself, i.e. the date of passing of interim order, quoted above, (iv) It would be apt to indicate that order of CO was on record with the memo of appeal. (v) The SOC, thereafter, permitted the appellants-petitioners to make necessary corrections/amendments in the memo of appeal vide order dated 14.06.2019, which reads as under : " पसतसत पनथरनन पत धलवपककट तसवट कक शसवद हवतस पसतसत वकयन गयन। पनथर कक ससनन गयन। वद० 25/5/19 कव सथनन पर वद० 28/05/19 पढन जनयव। पनथरननपत तदनससनर सवपकनर वकयन जनतन हह। पवतवनदप अपनन पक पसतसत करनव नहह आयव।" . (vi) After the order 14.06.2019 an application was preferred by the contesting opposite party for recall of order dated 14.06.2019 in compliance of which the corrections/amendments were carried out by the appellants-petitioners in the memo of appeal. This application was preferred on 13.11.2019. (vii) The aforesaid application preferred on 13.11.2019 was allowed vide order dated 07.12.2019. (viii) After the aforesaid, the SOC passed the order dated 14.12.2020 and by this order allowed the amendment application dated 13.06.2019 seeking preferred by the appellants-petitioners partly. The relevant portion of the order dated 14.12.2020 reads as under :- " आदवश उपरकक ववववचन कव आधनर पर सवशकधन पनथरननपत वदननववकत – 13.06.2019 कक आववशक रप सव सवपकनर करतव हहए अपपल मवमक व सथगन पनथरनन पत मम जहनव-जहनव वतधथ- 25.05.2019 अववकत हह, वहनव- वहनव वतधथ-28.05.2019 अववकत करनव कक अनसमवत पदनन कक जनतप हह। तदनससनर सवशकधन वकयन जनयव। वनसतव बहस पतनवलप वदननवक – 21.12.2020 कक पवश हक।" . (ix) It would be apt to indicate at this stage that the appellants- petitioners carried out the necessary corrections/amendments. (x) After the order dated 14.12.2020 the appellants-petitioners preferred an application dated 29.12.2020 for correction of order dated 13.06.2019 passed by SOC whereby the order of CO impugned before SOC was stayed till disposal of appeal i.e. 25.05.2019 (initially mentioned in the memo of appeal) which was subsequently corrected in memo of appeal in compliance of order of SOC as 28.05.2019. (xi) From the aforesaid facts what transpires is to the effect that the implementation and operation of order dated 25.05.2019 subsequently corrected as 28.05.2019, was stayed vide order dated 13.06.2019 by SOC and this order has not been recalled. (xii) In other words, the order dated 13.06.2019 staying the implementation and operation of order of CO in issue in appeal passed by SOC is still intact. (xiii) The appellants-petitioners in the aforesaid background of the case filed an application dated 14.12.2020/19.12.2020 for making corrections in the order dated 13.06.2019. This application was rejected by SOC vide impugned order dated 18.01.2021. Relevant part of the order dated 18.01.2021 reads as under :- " ममनव उभयपकक कव तकरव कक ससनन। मन० उचच नयनयनलय दनरन ररट यनवचकन सव0- 24057/2020 मम पनररत आदवश वदननवक-12.01.2021 कव दनरन यनचप कव सवशकधन पनथरननपत कन वनसतनरण वनयत वतधथ 16.01.2021 कक वनसतनररत वकयव जननव कन वनदरश वदयन गयन। वदननवक-16.01.2021 कक शकक पसतनव कव कनरण अधधवकनगण कनयर सव ववरत रहनव कव कनरण पतनवलप मम वदननवक-18.01.2021 वतधथ वनयत कक गयप। आज वदननवक-18.01.2021 कक उभयपकक कव तकरव कक ससनन गयन। अपपलनवट दनरन वदननवक-24.12.2020/29.12.2020 कक पनथरननपत दवकर सथगन आदवश 13.06.2019 मम धनरन-202 भभ- रनजसव अधधवनयम कव अनतगरत धलवपककय तसवट कव वनवनरण कव धलए वनणरय कक वतधथ मम 25.05.2019 कक जगह 28.05.2019 सवशकधधत वकयव जननव कक मनवग कक हह। पतनवलप कव अवलककन सव सपष हह वक सथगन पनथरननपत वदननवक-30.05.2019 मम अवर नयनयनलय दनरन पनररत आदवश वदननवक-25.05.2019 कक ददरनन अपपल सथवगत वकयव जननव कक मनवग कक गयप थप। ततकनलपन पपठनसपन अधधकनरप दनरन वदननवक-13.06.2019 कक अपपल कव वनसतनरण तक चकबनदप अधधकनरप कव आदवश वदननवक-25.05.2019 कन वकयननवयन एवव पभनव सथवगत वकयन गयन। इस पकनर सपष हह वक पनथर / अपपलनवट दनरन पसतसत सथगन पनथरननपत मम उवलधखत अवर नयनयनलय कव आदवश कक वतधथ कक हप सथवगत वकयन गयन हह, धजसमम वकसप पकनर कन धलवपककय तसवट कन हकनन नहह पनयन जनतन हह। यदवप अपपलनट दनरन वदननवक-13.06.2019 कक वदयव गए सवशकधन पनथरननपत पर ततकनलपन पपठनसपन अधधकनरप दनरन वदननवक-14.06.2019 कक एकपकपय रप सव सवशकधन पनथरननपत सवपकनर वकयन गयन, जक पवतपकप कव वनजदनयर पनथरननपत वदननववकत 13.11.2019 पर वदननवक-07.12.2019 कक आदवश वदननवक-14.06.2019 वनरसत वकयन गयन। तदसपरननत वदननवक-14.12.2020 कक अपपल मवमक व सथगन पनथरननपत मम वतधथ 25.05.2019 कव सथनन पर वतधथ 28.05.2019 अववकत वकयव जननव कन आदवश पनररत वकयन गयन। पशनगत पनथरननपत वदननवक -24.12.2020/29.12.2020 लगभग डवढ वरर ववलमब सव वदयन गयन हह। इस पकनर पभवर पपठनसपन अधधकनरप दनरन वदननवक - 13.06.2019 कक पनररत वकयव गयव सथगन आदवश मम अववकत वनणरय वतधथ कक सवशकधधत वकयव जननव सवबवधप पनथरननपत सवपकनर वकयव जननव यकगय नहह हह। तदनससनर अपपलनवट कन पनथरननपत वदननवक-24.12.2020/29.12.2020 वनसतनररत वकयन जनतन हह। वनसतव बहस पतनवलप वदननवक-29.01.2021 कक पवश हक।" . (xiv) Being aggrieved by order dated 18.01.2021 the appellants- petitioners filed the revision before the revisional authority/Deputy Director of Consolidation, Ayodhya (in short "DDC") under Section 48(3) of the Act of 1953 registered as Revision No. 1967/202154042300001248 (Surendranath Pathak and Anr. Vs. Itrat Hussain and Ors.). The revisional authority/DDC dismissed the revision vide impugned order dated 02.08.2024. The relevant portion of the same reads as under :- " पसतसत वकयव गयव तकर कव आलकक मम अवर नयनयनलय दनरन पनररत आदवश वदननवक 18.01.2021 कन अवलककन वकयन गयन। ससनवनई कव समय मनननपय उचच नयनयनलय कक ररट यनवचकन सवखयन 24057/2020 ससरवनदननथ पनठक व अनय बननम उप सवचनलक चकबनदप व अनय मम पनररत आदवश वदननवक 20.01.2021 कन अवलककन वकयन एवव मनननपय उचच नयनयनलय मम यकधजत ररट यनवचकन सवखयन 2884 ऑफ 2024 अवनल कस मनर व 3 अनय बननम उपसवचनलक चकबनदप व 41 अनय मम पनररत आदवश वदननवक 31.05.2024 कन अवलककन वकयन। धजससव वववदत हकतन हह वक पभरव पकरण सव सपष हह वक चकबनदप अधधकनरप दनरन पनररत आदवश कव ववरद दनधखल वनगरननपकतनर कक अपपल बनदकबसत अधधकनरप चकबनदप कव नयनयनलय मम आज भप पचधलत हह। दनधखल अपपल मम सवशकधन पर पनररत आदवश वदननवक 28.05.2019/25.05.2019 कक धलवपककय तसवट (Sleep of Pen) कव सवशकधन पर अवर नयनयनलय दनरन पसतसत पनथरनन पत कव आधनर पर वदननवक 18.01.2021 कक आदवश पनररत वकयन गयन। पनररत आदवश मम सवशकधन कन कवतनधधकनर आदवश पनररत करनव वनलव समबननधत नयनयनलय कव अधधकनर कवत मम हप वनवहत हकतन हह। उभयपकक कव बपच अपपलपय नयनयनलय मम आज भप अवसर ववदमनन हह। अवर नयनयनलय दनरन पनररत आदवश कन अवलककन कव उपरननत मवरप दवष सव बनदकबसत अधधकनरप चकबनदप दनरन पनररत आदवश मम वकसप पकनर कव हसतकवप कक आवशयकतन नहह हह। तदनससनर वनगरननप वनरसत वकयव जननव यकगय हह। आदवश उपरकक ववववचन कव आधनर पर यह वनगरननप वनरसत कक जनतप हह। पतनवलप वनद कनयरवनहप उपरननत सववचत अवभलवखनगनर हक।" . (xv) It would be apt to indicate that after the order dated 14.12.2020 an application was filed by the one of the private-opposite party, contesting the claim of the appellants-petitioners, namely Mohd. Hasim Hussain/respondent no.2 in WRIT - B No. 844 of 2024 and respondent no.21 in WRIT - B No. 9 of 2025. This application was filed in terms of Rule 109-A(1) of the Consolidation of Holdings Rules, 1954. This application was allowed by the impugned order dated 22.06.2024. The relevant portion of the same reads as under:- " इसकव पभवर करणनकक रण, अवनलकस मनर व करणनशवकर पसतगण ससरवनदननथ पनठक दनरन वनयम 109 कव ववरद टप०ए० पनथरनन पत धजलनधधकनरप महकदय कव यहनव वदयन गयन थन, जक वदननवक 4-1-2024 कक वनरसत कर वदयन गयन हह। आदवश वदननवक 7-12- 2019 कव अनसपनलन कव समबनध मम जक आखयन च०कतनर दनरन वदननवक 23-12-2019 एवव सहनयक चकबनदप अधधकनरप दनरन वदननवक 24-12-2019 कक दप गयप हह, उसकन अवलककन वकयन गयन। इसमम मभल तथय यह हह वक आदवश वदननवक 14-6-19 कन अवकल अवभलवख मम करनयन जन चसकन हह, और इस आदवश कक बनदकबसत अधधकनरप दनरन अपनव आदवश 7-12-2019 दनरन वनरसत कर वदयन गयन हह, इसधलए आदवश वदननवक 7-12-2019 कन अवकन करनयन जननन ववधधक हह, कयकवक यह अभप तक इस आदवश कव पवतकभ ल ककई भप आदवश ववपकप ससरवनदननथ पनठक यन उनकव बनररसननक दनरन पसतसत नहह वकयन गयन। ऐसव मम आदवश वदननवक 7-12-2019 कव आदवश कक ववधधक रप सव अवकन करनयन जननन ववधधक हह। कयकवक वनयम 109 कव अनतगरत और ववशवरकर वनयम 109 क (1) कव अनतगरत मवरव सतर सव ककई नयन आदवश पनररत नहह वकयन जनतन हह, कव वल चकबनदप पनधधकनरप सतर सव पनररत उन आदवशक कन अवकन करनयन जनतन हह जक धनरन 52 कव पकनशन कव बनद पनररत हकतव हह। इसधलए ककई पवतकभ ल आदवश पनररत न हकनव कव कनरण आदवश वद०-7-12-2019 एवव 14-12-2020 कक दवखनव सव सपष हह वक आदवश वद० 7-12-2020 वनरसत नहह हह, और इस आदवश दनरन पभवर मम पनररत आदवश वदननवक 14-06-19 वनरसत वकयन हह। आदवश वदननवक 14-6- 19 कन अवकन अवभलवख मम हह, इसधलए वदननवक 7-12-19 कन भप अवकन ववधधक रप सव हकनन चनवहए। इसमम जहनव तक मकतक खनतवदनरक एवव पककनरक कन पशन हह, इसकक दसरसतप मभल अपपल मम हप समभव हह। आदवश वदननवक 7-12-2019 कव अनसपनलन हवतस च०कतनर / स०च०अ० कक आखयन उपरकक अनसमकवदत कक जनतप हह। परवननन जनरप हक। बनद अमलदरनमद पतनवलप दनधखल दफतर हक।" . 7. 7. In the aforesaid factual background of the case, the petition(s), under consideration, have been filed. 8. Upon due consideration of aforesaid facts of the case including that order dated 13.06.2019 whereby the SOC protected the interest of the appellants-petitioners is still intact and in this order the date of order of CO was mentioned as 25.05.2019 for the reason that in the memo of appeal this date was mentioned and this date i.e. 25.05.2019 has now been corrected/amended as 28.05.2019, which is correct date of order of CO, in the memo of appeal in terms of order of SOC dated 13.06.2019 read with order of SOC dated 14.12.2020, this Court finds that the impugned order dated 02.08.2024 passed by DDC affirming the impugned order dated 18.01.2021 passed by SOC rejecting the application of the appellants-petitioners seeking correction of order dated 13.06.2019 only on the ground of delay are unjustified. 9. For the reasons aforesaid, the order dated 02.08.2024 and 18.01.2021 are hereby set aside. Order dated 22.06.2024. The matter is remanded back to SOC, Ayodhya to disposed of the application dated 24.12.2020/29.12.2020 seeking correction in order dated 13.06.2019 passed by SOC afresh in the light of aforesaid. 10. In so far as the impugned order dated 22.06.2024 passed by CO is concerned, the same shall be subject to the order passed by SOC. 11. With aforesaid, both the petition(s) are disposed of. No order as to costs. Order Date :- 9.4.2025 Mohit Singh/- Digitally signed by :- MOHIT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench