Allahabad High Court
KAMLESH KUMAR AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 7 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA
Holding
The orders of the Deputy Director of Consolidation are lawful and not liable to interference; the writ petition is dismissed.
Summary
The petitioners, Kamlesh Kumar and Smt. Ram Kali, who are holders of Chak No. 149 and Chak No. 1018 respectively, filed a writ petition challenging three orders issued by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Pilibhit under Section 48(1) and Section 21(2) of the Consolidation of Holdings (CH) Act concerning the alteration and allotment of their chaks. The petitioners argued that the alterations—6.85 paisa (0.076 hectare) in Chak 149 and 2.69 paisa (0.031 hectare) in Chak 1018—were improper and adversely affected their holdings. The Deputy Director held that these changes were minuscule, did not adversely affect the petitioners, and were made in accordance with Section 19 of the CH Act, thereby rejecting the petitioners' revision application. The High Court examined the submissions and found no merit in the petitioners' contentions, concluding that the Deputy Director's orders were lawful and free from infirmity. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether the orders passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation under Section 48(1) and Section 21(2) of the Consolidation of Holdings Act are legally valid.
- Whether the minor alterations in the area of the petitioners' chaks constitute a substantial prejudice warranting revision.
Legislation cited
- Consolidation of Holdings Act — s. 19, 21(2), 48(1)
Subjects
- chak allotment
- Consolidation of Holdings Act
- Section 48
- Section 21
- land alteration
- revision application
- writ petition
- High Court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - B No. - 3839 of 2026
Kamlesh Kumar And Another
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 7 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Surendra Pal
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 50
HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J.
Heard Shri Surendra Pal Gangwar, learned counsel for the petitioners,
learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents No. 1 to 3 and
perused the record.
The writ petition is being finally decided even without issuing notices to
the private respondent Nos. 4 to 8.
The writ petition has been filed questioning the legality, propriety and
correctness of the orders dated 2.12.2025 and 17.7.2026 passed by the
Deputy Director of Consolidation, Pilibhit, respondent No. 2 in case
registered as Case No. RST/0195/2025, under Section 48(1) of CH Act as
also order dated 5.6.2025 passed in Case No. 0040 of 2025
(Computerized Case No. 202554125600000040) (Vikas Dev versus
Nanhey lal) under Section 48 (1) of CH Act. The challenge has also been
laid to the order dated 25.10.2024 passed by the Settlement Officer of
Consolidation, Pilibhit in Case No. 0208 of 2024, under Section 21 (2) of
the CH Act.
The writ petition relates to the allotment of chaks.
From the materials brought on record, the petitioner No. 1, Kamlesh
Kumar is the chak holder of Chak No. 149 while the petitioner No. 2,
namely, Smt. Ram Kali is the chak holder of Chak No. 1018. An exparte
order dated 5.6.2025 came to be passed against the petitioners by
the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Pilibhit.
WRIB No. 3839 of 2026
2
A restoration application dated 17.9.2025 was filed by the petitioners on
which notices were issued to the parties concerned and vide order dated
2.12.2025, the restoration application was allowed and 9.7.2026 was fixed
for final disposal. The petitioners were heard by the Deputy Director of
Consolidation, Pilibhit. The Deputy Director of Consolidation,
Pilibhit under the impugned order dated 17.7.2026 has recorded
categorical findings that in the Chak No. 149 of the petitioner No. 1, an
alternation of 6.85 paisa area 0.076 hectare has been made while in the
Chak No. 1018 of the petitioner No. 2, an alteration of 2.69 paisa area
0.031 hectare has been done, which is minuscule and does not affect
adversely the chak holders.
Both the petitioners have been allotted chak over their original holdings
contained in Plot Nos. 1192 and 1193. The Deputy Director of
Consolidation, Pilibhit has also recorded categorical finding that
the minuscule changes in the chak valuation and area of the petitioners
have been done taking into consideration the provisions of Section 19 of
the CH Act. The Deputy Director of Consolidation, Pilibhit has
accordingly rejected the revision and maintained the earlier order dated
5.6.2025 in the wake of the findings recorded by the Deputy Director of
Consolidation, Pilibhit in the impugned order.
I find no substance in the submissions advanced by the learned counsel
for the petitioners. The order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation,
Pilibhit is in accordance with law, suffers from no infirmity, warranting
any interference by this Court.
The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed.
(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)
September 17, 2026
Ravi Prakash
Digitally signed by :-
RAVI PRAKASH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…