Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:50234 Court No. - 50 Case :- WRIT - B No. - 1283 of 2025 Petitioner :- Murtza Hussain Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anup Swaroop Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Chandra Kumar Rai,J. 1. Heard Sri Hari Shanker Chaurasia, holding the brief of Mr. Anup Swaroop Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Mridul Kumar, learned standing counsel for the state- respondents. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is the chak holder no.869. Plot Nos. 1762, 1763, 1764, 1766 and 1777, total area 0.618 hect. were the original plots of the petitioner. In the proceeding under Section 9-A(2) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the "U.P. C.H. Act"), an order dated 28.9.2017 was passed by which the aforementioned petitioner's plots, were declared as C.H.-18. In the chak allotment proceeding, chak Appeal No.1032, under Section 21(2) of the U.P. C.H. Act was decided vide order dated 27.11.2010. Against the order dated 27.11.2010, a revision was filed by respondent no.5/Abdul Wahaw along with prayer for condonation of delay. In the aforementioned revision, petitioner was not impleaded as party. The Additional District Magistrate (Administration)/Deputy Director of Consolidation, Bijnor heard the aforementioned time-barred revision and condoned the delay in filing the revision. The revision was heard finally and vide order dated 29.8.2014, the same was allowed, affecting the chak holder nos. 1026, 1126, 1216, 796, 794, 795, 86, 913-A, 622, 1081, 895, 437-A, 25, 281, 302, bachat, nalli, chak marg, etc. Against the revisional order dated 29.8.2014, petitioner filed a time-barred restoration application dated 16.6.2016 with the prayer that the ex parte order dated 29.8.2014 be set aside and the revision be heard afresh after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the parties. Certain other restoration applications were also filed against the order dated 29.8.2014 which were heard together by the Deputy Director of Consolidation and vide order dated 21.1.2025, restoration application filed by the petitioner as well as by the other parties were dismissed. Hence, this writ petition for the following relief:- " Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 21.1.2025, passed by respondent no.2/Deputy Director of Consolidation, Bijnor in Case No.RST/0030/2016 (Computerized Case No.201654131600000030) (Abdul Wahaw vs. Mustafai Begum), under Section 48(1) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 by which the respondent no.2 rejected the restoration application filed by the petitioner (Annexure no.1 to this writ petition). 3. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the chak revision filed by respondent no.5, petitioner was not impleaded as party but his right has been affected. He submitted that plot no.1766 is the original plot of the petitioner and under the order dated 29.8.2024, the area of the petitioner's original plot has been taken out and has been allotted to the revisionist of the chak revision. He submitted that as soon as the petitioner came to know about the order dated 29.8.2014, restoration application dated 16.6.2016 was filed for necessary relief in the matter. He submitted that the Deputy Director of Consolidation has dismissed the petitioner's restoration application without considering the claim as set up in the restoration application dated 16.6.2016. 4. On the other hand, learned standing counsel for the State submitted that the petitioner's chak has not been affected under the order dated 29.8.2014, as such, the petitioner has no right to tile time-barred restoration application against the order dated 29.8.2014. He submitted that the petitioner's restoration application has been rightly rejected under the impugned order. 5. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 6. There is no dispute about the fact that the petitioner is chak holder no.869. There is also no dispute about the fact that in chak Revision No.321 of 2014, filed by respondent no.5, petitioner was not impleaded rather respondent no.6/Smt. Mustafai Begum, wife of Badruddin was impleaded as opposite party. 7. In order to appreciate the controversy involved in the matter, the perusal of the operative portion of the order dated 29.8.2014 passed by the Additional District Magistrate (Administration)/Deputy Director of Consolidation, Bijnor will be relevant which is as under:- " नययययलय उप ससचयलक चकबनदद/ अपर जजलयजधकयरद (पशयसन) बबजननर। बनगरयनद ससखयय-321 धयरय-48 जजत चकबनदद अजधबनयम। अ० बहयव बनयम शदमतद ममसतफयई बबगम। गयम कसबय झयलल परगनय दयरयनगर तहसदल व जजलय बबजननर। आदबश उपरजक चबचरत बववबचनय कब आधयर पर बनगरयनद सवदकयर कक जयतद हह। ससलग ससशजधन तयजलकय जजससब चक ससखयय-1026, 1126, 1216, 796, 794, 795, 86, 913 अ, 622, 1081, 895, 437 अ, 25, 281, 302 बचत, नयलद चकमयगर पभयबवत हजतब हह तथय जजस पर मबरब हसतयकर हह, इस आदबश कय असग रहबगद। ससशजजधत आकयर पत 23 भयग-1 व 3 बवतररत हज। बयद अमल दरयमद पतयवलद दयजखल दफतर हज। बदनयसक-29/08/14 ह० अप० 29.08.14 (वद०एस०चनधरद) अपर जजलयजधकयरद (पशयसन) उप ससचयलक चकबनदद-बबजननर।" 8. The perusal of the operative portion of the revisional orders as quoted above demonstrates that chak number of the petitioner has not been mentioned in the operative portion of the revisional order and the schedule attached with the order dated 29.8.2024 also demonstrates that chak of the petitioner has not been affected in any manner under the revisional order dated 29.8.2024. The Addl. District Magistrate (Administration)/Deputy Director of Consolidation, while passing the impugned order, has recorded finding of fact that petitioner has no right to file restoration application in the matter as petitioner's right has not been affected in any manner under the order dated 29.8.2014. 9. Considering the entire facts and circumstances, there is no scope of interference against the impugned order passed by the consolidation authorities. 10. The writ petition is misconceived and dismissed accordingly. Order Date :- 8.4.2025 C.Prakash Digitally signed by :- CHANDRA PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad