{"id":225487,"date":"2010-08-09T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-08-08T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rayees-ors-vs-deputy-director-of-consolidation-on-9-august-2010"},"modified":"2016-06-18T08:37:43","modified_gmt":"2016-06-18T03:07:43","slug":"rayees-ors-vs-deputy-director-of-consolidation-on-9-august-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rayees-ors-vs-deputy-director-of-consolidation-on-9-august-2010","title":{"rendered":"Rayees &amp; Ors. vs Deputy Director Of Consolidation &#8230; on 9 August, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Allahabad High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Rayees &amp; Ors. vs Deputy Director Of Consolidation &#8230; on 9 August, 2010<\/div>\n<pre>In the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow\nBench, Lucknow.\n\n(A.F.R.)\n\nCourt No. - 19\n\nCase :- CONSOLIDATION No. - 503 of 2010\n\nPetitioner :- Rayees &amp; Ors.\nRespondent :- Deputy Director Of Consolidation Bahraich Camp Balrampur\n&amp;O\nPetitioner Counsel :- N.N. Jaiswal\nRespondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,Atul Kr. Singh,Jay Prakash Singh,R.N. Gupta\n\nHon'ble S.C. Chaurasia,J.\n<\/pre>\n<p>1. Heard Sri N.N.Jaiswal, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri<br \/>\nG.S.Misra, learned Standing Counsel, Sri Jai Prakash Singh,<br \/>\nlearned counsel for opposite party no. 3, Sri R.N.Gupta, learned<br \/>\ncounsel for opposite party no. 4 and perused the record.\n<\/p>\n<p>2. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India<br \/>\nhas been filed with the prayer that a writ, order or direction in the<br \/>\nnature of certiorari may be issued quashing the impugned order<br \/>\ndated 07-04-2010 passed by the opposite party no. 1, contained as<br \/>\nAnnexure No. 13 to the writ petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the order<br \/>\npassed by the Deputy Director, Consolidation in the month of<br \/>\nDecember 1971 in favour of the petitioners&#8217; grand-father, Musahib<br \/>\nwas incorporated in C.H. form no. 45 i.e. the final record of<br \/>\nconsolidation. Thereafter, the notification under section 52(1) of<br \/>\nthe U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act was issued and<br \/>\nconsolidation operations were closed. Learned counsel for the<br \/>\npetitioners is not in a position to disclose the exact date of<br \/>\nnotification issued under section 52(1) of the said Act. He has<br \/>\nfurther submitted that an application dated 04-02-2009 under<br \/>\nsection 48(3) of the Consolidation of Holdings Act moved on<br \/>\nbehalf of opposite party no. 3, Kasim Ali in the court of Deputy<br \/>\nDirector, Consolidation, Balrampur for cancelling the said entries<br \/>\nmade in C.H. from No. 45, on the ground of alleged fraud, was not<br \/>\nmaintainable and hence, the Deputy Director, Consolidation has<br \/>\ncommitted an illegality in exercise of its jurisdiction by allowing<br \/>\nthe said application and cancelling the said entries. His contention<br \/>\nis that the impugned order dated 07-04-2010 passed by Deputy<br \/>\nDirector, Consolidation, Bahraich camp at Balrampur is without<br \/>\n jurisdiction and hence, it deserves to be quashed. He has further<br \/>\nsubmitted that section 48(3) of the Consolidation of Holdings Act<br \/>\nrelates to making reference, but, no reference was made by the<br \/>\ncompetent authority and hence, the impugned order deserves to be<br \/>\nquashed.\n<\/p>\n<p>4. Learned counsel for opposite party no. 3 has submitted that the<br \/>\nmutation in the record in pursuance of the order passed in the<br \/>\nmonth of December 1971 by the Deputy Director,Consolidation<br \/>\nwas made after about 35 years. On getting information about it, he<br \/>\nmoved an application under section 48(3) of the U.P.<br \/>\nConsolidation of Holdings Act for cancelling the said entries,<br \/>\nbecause, the said entries were obtained by petitioners&#8217; predecessor<br \/>\nby practising fraud on the court. His contention is that since the<br \/>\nfraud was practised in obtaining the said entries, learned Deputy<br \/>\nDirector, Consolidation was perfectly justified in entertaining the<br \/>\napplication under section 48(3) of the Consolidation of Holdings<br \/>\nAct and cancelling the said entries and there is no valid ground to<br \/>\nquash the impugned order.\n<\/p>\n<p>5. Learned Standing Counsel has submitted that the land in dispute<br \/>\nwas acquired by the State and it was recorded as road, but, by<br \/>\npractising fraud on the court, the said entries were obtained in<br \/>\nfavour of petitioners&#8217; predecessor. He has further submitted that<br \/>\nlearned Deputy Director, Consolidation has not committed any<br \/>\nillegality in exercise of its jurisdiction in cancelling the said<br \/>\nentries.\n<\/p>\n<p>6. Section 48 of the Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 may be<br \/>\nquoted as under :-\n<\/p>\n<p>48. Revision and reference-(1) The Director of Consolidation may<br \/>\ncall for and examine the record of any case decided or proceedings<br \/>\ntaken by any subordinate authority for the purpose of satisfying<br \/>\nhimself as to the regularity of the proceedings; or as to the<br \/>\ncorrectness, legality or propriety of any order(other than<br \/>\ninterlocutory order) passed by such authority in the case of<br \/>\nproceedings and may, after allowing the parties concerned an<br \/>\nopportunity of being heard, make such order in the case of<br \/>\nproceedings as he thinks fit.\n<\/p>\n<p>(2) Powers under sub-section (1) may be exercised by the Director<br \/>\nof Consolidation also on a reference under sub-section (3)<\/p>\n<p>(3) Any authority subordinate to the Director of Consolidation<br \/>\nmay, after allowing the parties concerned an opportunity of being<br \/>\n heard, refer the record of any case or proceedings to the Director<br \/>\nof Consolidation for action under sub-section (1)<\/p>\n<p>Explanation (1)-For the purposes of this section, Settlement<br \/>\nOfficers, Consolidation, Consolidation Officers, Assistant<br \/>\nConsolidation Officers, Consolidator and Consolidation Lekhpals<br \/>\nshall be subordinate to the Director of Consolidation.\n<\/p>\n<p>Explanation (2)-For the purposes of this section the expression<br \/>\n&#8216;interlocutory order&#8217; in relation to a case or proceedings, means<br \/>\nsuch order deciding any matter arising in such case or proceeding<br \/>\nor collateral thereto as does not have the effect of finally disposing<br \/>\nof such case or proceeding.\n<\/p>\n<p>Explanation(3)-The power under this section to examine the<br \/>\ncorrectness, legality or propriety of any order includes the power<br \/>\nto examine any finding, whether of fact or law, recorded by any<br \/>\nsubordinate authority, and also includes the power to re-appreciate<br \/>\nany oral or documentary evidence.\n<\/p>\n<p>7. It has not been disputed at Bar that the powers of Director of<br \/>\nConsolidation have been delegated to the Deputy Director,<br \/>\nConsolidation, for exercising jurisdiction under section 48 of the<br \/>\nU.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act and the Director of<br \/>\nConsolidation and the Deputy Director, Consolidation are the<br \/>\ncontemporary authorities as far as section 48 of the said Act is<br \/>\nconcerned. Explanation (1) appended to section 48 of the said Act<br \/>\nprovides that the Settlement Officers, Consolidation,<br \/>\nConsolidation Officers, Assistant Consolidation Officers,<br \/>\nConsolidator and Consolidation Lekhpals shall be subordinate to<br \/>\nthe Director of Consolidation. It indicates that an application under<br \/>\nsection 48(3) of the said Act can be moved before any of the courts<br \/>\nsubordinate to the Director of Consolidation, as mentioned in<br \/>\nExplanation (1) as referred to above.\n<\/p>\n<p>8. In view of section 48(3) of the said Act, any authority<br \/>\nsubordinate to the Director of Consolidation may, after allowing<br \/>\nthe parties concerned an opportunity of being heard, refer the<br \/>\nrecord of any case or proceedings to the Director of Consolidation<br \/>\nfor action under sub-section (1).Thus, it is clear that any authority<br \/>\nsubordinate to the Director of Consolidation only can refer the<br \/>\nrecord of any case or proceedings to the Director of Consolidation<br \/>\nfor action, as provided in sub-section (3) of Section 48 of the said<br \/>\nAct. Admittedly, the Deputy Director, Consolidation exercising<br \/>\npowers of Director of Consolidation under section 48 of the said<br \/>\nAct was not an authority subordinate to the Director of<br \/>\n Consolidation and hence, the Deputy Director, Consolidation had<br \/>\nno jurisdiction to entertain the application under section 48(3) of<br \/>\nthe said Act, moved on behalf of opposite party no. 3, Kasim Ali.<br \/>\nSince, the Deputy Director, Consolidation lacks jurisdiction to<br \/>\nentertain the said application, the order passed thereon, on any<br \/>\nground whatsoever, is also without jurisdiction and hence, it<br \/>\ncannot be sustained.\n<\/p>\n<p>9. Section 48(3) of the Consolidation of Holdings Act provides for<br \/>\nmaking a reference for action in appropriate cases, but, in the<br \/>\ninstant case, no reference was made for taking action under sub-<br \/>\nsection (1) of Section 48 of the said Act. Instead of it, application<br \/>\nunder section 48(3) of the said Act was allowed and the entries in<br \/>\nquestion were cancelled.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.From the perusal of sub-section (2) and (3) of Section 48 of the<br \/>\nsaid Act, it is clear that powers under sub-section(1) of Section 48<br \/>\nof the said Act can be exercised only when a reference is made by<br \/>\nthe competent authority in accordance with sub-section (3) of<br \/>\nsection 48 of the said Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>11. Since, the impugned order dated 07-04-2010 passed by Deputy<br \/>\nDirector, Consolidation on the application under section 48(3) of<br \/>\nthe said Act moved on behalf of opposite party no. 3 is without<br \/>\njurisdiction and it cannot be sustained and deserves to be quashed.\n<\/p>\n<p>12.It is made clear that this court has not entered into the merits of<br \/>\ncontroversy between the parties.\n<\/p>\n<p>13. A writ of certiorari is issued quashing the impugned order<br \/>\ndated 07-04-2010 passed by the opposite party no. 1, contained as<br \/>\nAnnexure No. 13 to the writ petition. However, the opposite<br \/>\nparties nos. 2 to 4 are at liberty to approach the appropriate forum<br \/>\nfor redressal of their grievances, if any.\n<\/p>\n<p>14. With these observations\/directions, the writ petition stands<br \/>\ndisposed of finally at the admission stage.\n<\/p>\n<p>Order Date:4.8.2010.\n<\/p>\n<p>AKS\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Allahabad High Court Rayees &amp; Ors. vs Deputy Director Of Consolidation &#8230; on 9 August, 2010 In the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow. (A.F.R.) Court No. &#8211; 19 Case :- CONSOLIDATION No. &#8211; 503 of 2010 Petitioner :- Rayees &amp; Ors. Respondent :- Deputy Director Of Consolidation Bahraich Camp Balrampur &amp;O [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[9,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-225487","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-allahabad-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.4 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Rayees &amp; Ors. vs Deputy Director Of Consolidation ... on 9 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rayees-ors-vs-deputy-director-of-consolidation-on-9-august-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Rayees &amp; Ors. vs Deputy Director Of Consolidation ... on 9 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rayees-ors-vs-deputy-director-of-consolidation-on-9-august-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-08-08T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-06-18T03:07:43+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rayees-ors-vs-deputy-director-of-consolidation-on-9-august-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rayees-ors-vs-deputy-director-of-consolidation-on-9-august-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Rayees &amp; Ors. vs Deputy Director Of Consolidation &#8230; on 9 August, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-18T03:07:43+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rayees-ors-vs-deputy-director-of-consolidation-on-9-august-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1322,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Allahabad High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rayees-ors-vs-deputy-director-of-consolidation-on-9-august-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rayees-ors-vs-deputy-director-of-consolidation-on-9-august-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rayees-ors-vs-deputy-director-of-consolidation-on-9-august-2010\",\"name\":\"Rayees &amp; Ors. vs Deputy Director Of Consolidation ... on 9 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-18T03:07:43+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rayees-ors-vs-deputy-director-of-consolidation-on-9-august-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rayees-ors-vs-deputy-director-of-consolidation-on-9-august-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rayees-ors-vs-deputy-director-of-consolidation-on-9-august-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Rayees &amp; Ors. vs Deputy Director Of Consolidation &#8230; on 9 August, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Rayees &amp; Ors. vs Deputy Director Of Consolidation ... on 9 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rayees-ors-vs-deputy-director-of-consolidation-on-9-august-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Rayees &amp; Ors. vs Deputy Director Of Consolidation ... on 9 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rayees-ors-vs-deputy-director-of-consolidation-on-9-august-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-08-08T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-06-18T03:07:43+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rayees-ors-vs-deputy-director-of-consolidation-on-9-august-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rayees-ors-vs-deputy-director-of-consolidation-on-9-august-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Rayees &amp; Ors. vs Deputy Director Of Consolidation &#8230; on 9 August, 2010","datePublished":"2010-08-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-18T03:07:43+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rayees-ors-vs-deputy-director-of-consolidation-on-9-august-2010"},"wordCount":1322,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Allahabad High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rayees-ors-vs-deputy-director-of-consolidation-on-9-august-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rayees-ors-vs-deputy-director-of-consolidation-on-9-august-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rayees-ors-vs-deputy-director-of-consolidation-on-9-august-2010","name":"Rayees &amp; Ors. vs Deputy Director Of Consolidation ... on 9 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-08-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-18T03:07:43+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rayees-ors-vs-deputy-director-of-consolidation-on-9-august-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rayees-ors-vs-deputy-director-of-consolidation-on-9-august-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rayees-ors-vs-deputy-director-of-consolidation-on-9-august-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Rayees &amp; Ors. vs Deputy Director Of Consolidation &#8230; on 9 August, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/225487","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=225487"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/225487\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=225487"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=225487"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=225487"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}