Allahabad High Court
VINAY KUMAR AND 8 OTHERSversusDEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION AND 11 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- CHANDRA KUMAR RAI
Holding
The Court held that the petitioners must be given an opportunity of hearing and ordered issuance of notice to the respondents while maintaining the status quo pending a fresh hearing.
Summary
The petitioners, recorded tenure holders of Gata No. 2276 (0.7139 ha) in Shikarpur, Bulandshahr, challenged an ex‑parte order dated 30‑07‑1994 that reduced their land by 0.100 ha and merged it into Gata No. 2275, which belongs to respondents and is claimed to be abadi land excluded from consolidation. They appealed to the Settlement Officer, who on 14‑01‑2021 allowed the appeal and remanded the matter for a merits decision. The respondents filed a revision, and on 15‑12‑2025 the Revision Officer set aside the Settlement Officer’s order, prompting the petitioners to seek relief. The High Court noted that the petitioners were not afforded a hearing before the 1994 order and that the status of Gata No. 2275 as abadi land required clarification. The Court directed that notice be issued to the respondents, an affidavit of service be filed, and the parties maintain the status quo, with the matter listed for fresh hearing on 07‑07‑2026.
Issues considered
- Whether an ex‑parte order reducing a petitioner's land without a prior hearing is valid under land consolidation law.
- Whether Gata No. 2275, being abadi land, falls within the scope of consolidation proceedings.
- Whether the revision order of 15‑12‑2025 that set aside the Settlement Officer’s decision should stand.
Subjects
- land consolidation
- ex‑parte order
- right to hearing
- abadi land
- revision petition
- status quo
- property rights
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - B No. - 1761 of 2026
Vinay Kumar And 8 Others
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Deputy Director Of Consolidation And 11 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Satyendra Pandey
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 32
HON'BLE SUDHANSHU CHAUHAN, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned standing counsel
for the State-respondents.
2. The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 15.12.2025 passed by
the respondent no. 1 by means of which the revision filed by the
respondent no. 4 has been allowed.
3. The contention of the petitioners is that the petitioners are the recorded
tenure holders of Gata No. 2276 having an area 0.7139 hectare situated at
Village Shikarpur, Pargana and Tehsil Shikarpur, District Bulandshahr
and their names have also been shown in CH-Form 23. Gata No. 2275
belongs to respondent nos. 4 to 11, the said land has been kept out of
consolidation proceedings being abadi land.
4. However, by means of an ex-parte order dated 30.07.1994, respondent
no. 3 reduced the area of Gata No. 2276 belonging to the petitioners by
0.100 hectare and included the same in Gata No. 2275. The petitioners on
coming to know about the aforesaid order had filed an appeal before the
respondent no. 2, essentially on the ground that no opportunity of hearing
was afforded to the petitioners prior to the passing of the order dated
30.07.1994 and also that the Gata No. 2275 did not fall under the
consolidation operation as it is abadi land. The Settlement Officer
Consolidation by means of the order dated 14.01.2021 had allowed the
appeal so filed by the petitioners and remanded the matter back to the
Consolidation Officer to decide the same on the merits of the controversy.
WRIB No. 1761 of 2026
2
5. The respondent nos. 4 to 11 being aggrieved by the order dated
14.01.2021 passed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation had filed a
revision before the respondent no. 1 and the respondent no. 1 completely
overlooking the fact that the order dated 30.07.1994 was passed ex-parte
without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioners by means
of the order dated 15.12.2025 had allowed the revision and set aside the
order dated 14.01.2021 passed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation.
6. It is contended on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners were not
afforded any opportunity of hearing prior to reduction of the area of the
plot of the petitioners and also that the Gata No. 2275 belonging to the
respondent nos. 4 to 11 has been kept out of consolidation proceedings as
it is an abadi land.
7. Matter requires consideration.
8. Issue notice to the respondent nos. 4 to 11 by speed post as well as dasti
notices be handed over to the petitioner.
9. Let affidavit of service be filed by the petitioner before the next date of
listing.
10. Steps for service of notice be taken within three days.
11. Put up this case as fresh on 07.07.2026.
12. Till the next date of listing, the parties are directed to maintain status
quo.
(Sudhanshu Chauhan,J.)
May 14, 2026
Arif
Digitally signed by :-
MOHAMMAD ARIF
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…