HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - B No. - 3556 of 2025 Court No. - 37 HON'BLE CHANDRA KUMAR RAI, J. 1. Heard Sri Ranjeet Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioners and Dr. Govind Kumar Saxena, learned Addl. C.S.C. for the state- respondents. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioners are chak holder no.222. The original plots of the petitioners are 196, 178, etc. The petitioner's father were proposed two chaks, comprising of their original plots. Petitioner's father filed chak objection which was allowed vide order dated 23.2.2022. Against the order dated 23.2.2022, petitioner's father filed appeal with the prayer that two chaks allotted to the petitioners, should be made adjacent in order to do cultivation in the adjacent chaks in proper manner. The Settlement Officer of Consolidation vide order dated 26.11.2024 dismissed the chak appeal filed by petitioner's father. The chak revision filed by the petitioners has also been dismissed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation vide order dated 22.7.2025. Hence, this petition for the following reliefs:- "(a). Issue a writ, order or direction in nature of certiorari quashing the impugned orders dated 22.07.2025 passed by respondent no.2, dismissing the Revision No.724/202454137400012278 (Charan Singh Vs Gopi and others) under section 48 of U.P. Consolidation of Holding Act and in Appeal No. 428/20235413740000008 (Charan Singh Vs Gopi and others) filed by the petitioner under section 21 (2) of U.P. Consolidation of Holding Act. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ranjeet Kumar Yadav, Sonu Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Sanjay And 3 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 13 Others .....Respondent(s) (b). Issue any other, writ, order of direction, which this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. (c). Award the costs of the writ petition to the petitioner." 3. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that chak appeal and chak revision filed by the petitioners have been dismissed by the Settlement Officer of Consolidation and the Deputy Director of Consolidation respectively in arbitrary manner. He further submitted that without considering the petitioners' claim as set up in the appeal and revision, the impugned orders have been passed by the consolidation authorities. He further submitted that without making any spot inspection, the impugned orders have been passed by the consolidation authorities, as such, the impugned orders should be set aside. He submitted that hardship of the petitioners has not been considered in proper manner, as such, the writ petition should be allowed and the claim as set up in appeal and revision should be considered in proper manner. 4. On the other hand, learned Addl. C.S.C. for the state-respondents submitted that the petitioners have been allotted two chaks on their original plots, as such, there is no illegality in the orders impugned passed by the consolidation authorities. He further submitted that no interference is required in the matter and the instant writ petition should be dismissed. 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 petitioners were allotted two chaks on their original plots. There is also no dispute about the fact that the chak objection filed by petitioners' father was allowed but chak appeal and chak revision filed by petitioners' father/petitioners were dismissed. 7. It is material to mention that the Settlement Officer of Consolidation and the Deputy Director of Consolidation have recorded finding that the petitioners have been allotted two chaks on their original plots, as such, further prayer made in the chak appeal and chak revision, cannot be allowed as by allowing the prayer of the petitioners, the other tenure holders will be affected. WRIB No. 3556 of 2025 2 8. The C.H. Form 23 of the petitioners which is annexed as Annexure No.1 to the writ petition as well as the impugned orders passed by the consolidation authorities demonstrate that petitioners have been adjusted on their original plots as far as possible, as such, there is no scope for interference against the orders impugned passed by the consolidation authorities in the allotment of chak proceeding. 9. The writ petition is dismissed accordingly. September 4, 2025 C.Prakash WRIB No. 3556 of 2025 3 (Chandra Kumar Rai,J.) Digitally signed by :- CHANDRA PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad