Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:86497 Court No. - 50 Case :- WRIT - B No. - 1919 of 2025 Petitioner :- Smt. Saumoti Devi Respondent :- Deputy Director Of Consolidation Agra And 10 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dr. Akhilesh Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- Avinash Chandra Srivastava,C.S.C. Hon'ble Chandra Kumar Rai,J. 1. Heard Dr. Akhilesh Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Satyendra Bhushan Dubey, learned Standing Counsel for the State- respondents and Mr. Avinash Chandra Srivastava, learned counsel for the Gaon Sabha. 2. Stamp reporter has reported laches of 433 days in filing the instant petition, which has been explained in para-13 of the writ petition. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is chak holder nos.690 & 691. In respect to chak no.690, petitioner was proposed single chak on her original plot no.766. In respect to chak no.691, petitioner was proposed single chak on her original plot no.879 along with adjacent plot no.878. Against the proposal of Assistant Consolidation Officer, petitioner has not filed any chak objection. Chak objection was filed by the private respondents, namely, Maan Devi, Chandrabhan and others, which were clubbed and heard together. The Consolidation Officer vide order dated 27.2.2021 decided the aforementioned chak objection. Petitioner was not affected by the order of the Consolidation Officer. Against the order of the Consolidation Officer, petitioner filed time barred chak appeal before Settlement Officer of Consolidation which was registered as Case No.1448 of 2022. Settlement Officer of Consolidation vide order dated 30.11.2022 dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner on the ground that the chak of the petitioner has already been affected vide order dated 25.5.2022, as such, the instant chak appeal cannot be entertained. Order dated 25.5.2022 was passed by the Settlement Officer of Consolidation in Appeal No.131, under Section 21 (2) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as "U.P.C.H. Act") filed by Bhoori Devi by which the appeal of Bhoori Devi (chak holder no.364) was allowed. By the order dated 25.5.2022, the area 0.162 hectare of plot no.879M was taken out from the chak of the petitioner and petitioner was allotted area 0.162 hectare on plot no.878M. Against both the appellate orders dated 30.11.2022 & 25.5.2022, petitioner filed revision under Section 48 of U.P.C.H. Act praying that the chak allotted to petitioner on plot no.878 be taken out and in lieu thereof petitioner should be given single chak on her original plot no.766. Revision was registered as case no.1511 of 2022. Additional District Magistrate/ Deputy Director of Consolidation vide order dated 23.11.2023 dismissed the revision holding that prayer made by the petitioner cannot be allowed as petitioner has been adjusted on her original plot according to her share. Hence this writ petition for the following reliefs: "i. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 23.11.2023 passed by respondent no.1 in Revision No.1511 of 2022 (Saumoti Devi vs. Bhagwan Das and others). ii. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 30.11.2022 passed by respondent no.2 in appeal no.1448 of 2022 (Saumoti Devi vs. Bhagwan Das and others) and order dated 27.2.2021 passed by respondent no.3. iii. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to evict from the land in dispute and not to interfere in possession of petitioner in pursuance of the impugned orders." 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not filed any objection but in chak appeal petitioner has prayed that she should be adjusted on her original plot no.766 as she is small tenure holder. He further submitted that the appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed on misconceived ground. He further submitted that in revision petitioner has challenged both the appellate order praying the same relief for allotment of single chak on her original plot no.766 but revision has been dismissed without considering the case of the petitioner, as such, the impugned order should be set aside and the relief prayed in the appeal as well as revision should be allowed in favour of the petitioner. 5. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for the State- respondents and learned counsel for the gaon sabha submitted that the petitioner has not filed any chak objection, as such, chak appeal filed by the petitioner has been rightly dismissed. They further submitted that in revision Deputy Director of Consolidation has mentioned that the petitioner has been adjusted on her original plots, as such, no further interference can be made by the consolidation authorities. 6. I have considered the argument advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State and perused the records. 7. There is no dispute about the fact that the petitioner has been allotted single chak in respect to their respective chak number on her original plot according to her share. 8. Perusal of C.H. Form 23 of the petitioner in respect to her chak nos.690 & 691, order passed by the Consolidation Officer, Settlement Officer of Consolidation and Deputy Director of Consolidation demonstrates that the petitioner has been rightly adjusted on her original plot, as such, no further interference can be made by the consolidation authorities. 9. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, no interference is required against the impugned orders passed by the consolidation authorities in the allotment of chak proceeding. 10. The writ petition is dismissed accordingly. Order Date :- 22.5.2025 Rameez Digitally signed by :- RAMEEZ AHMED High Court of Judicature at Allahabad