Ram Karan & Anr. v. Janardan Prakash, Raj Kumar Kesari

Heard Sri Raj Kumar Kesari and Sri Janardan Prakash, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Tarun Gaur, learned standing counsel for the state-respondents.

Counsel for the petitioners submitted that plot no.104, belonging to the petitioners, is situated adjacent to the main road, accordingly, an application under Section 9-A(2) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 was filed to declare the plot as C.H. 18. He submitted that on the basis of the report submitted in the proceeding, an order was passed by the Consolidation Officer on 24.8.2023, declaring the plot no.104, area 0.0631 hect. as C.H.18. He submitted that time-barred appeal was filed by respondent no.5 who is the owner of plot no.105 and the Settlement Officer of Consolidation has dismissed the appeal on the ground of limitation as well as maintainability. He submitted that the revisional court has allowed the revision, setting aside the order of the Consolidation Officer as well as Settlement Officer of Consolidation and remitted the matter back before the Consolidation Officer to decide the proceeding afresh which is abuse of process of law. He placed reliance on the judgment of this Court reported in 2014 (125) RD 145, Rajendra Kumar Upadhya vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation, Azamgarh and Another, in order to demonstrate that the recorded tenure holders of the road-side plot, can apply to declare the plot as C.H.18.

Matter requires consideration. 2 WRIB No. 1438 of 2026

Issue notice to respondent nos.5 to 8, returnable at an early date.

Steps within 10 days.

Respondent Nos. 5 to 8 shall file their counter affidavits within 6 weeks. Petitioner will file rejoinder affidavit within two weeks thereafter.

List on 8.7.2026, before the appropriate Bench.

Until further orders of this Court, the effect and operation of the order dated 26.12.2025, passed by respondent no.2/Deputy Director of Consolidation, shall remain stayed. April 3, 2026 C.Prakash (Chandra Kumar Rai,J.)