In Brief
A temple owned land plot in a consolidation area. During consolidation proceedings, the temple received allotments, and a frontage portion was reserved as common land (bachat land) for village use. When another landowner's appeal resulted in the Settlement Officer re-allotting that frontage to Deoki Devi, the temple lost road access despite not being party to that appeal. The temple challenged this in revision. The High Court dismissed the challenge, saying the temple had lost title by accepting the original allotment. The Supreme Court held that when a subsequent consolidation order materially adversely affects a person—here, by denying road access—that person can challenge it, even if not party to the original proceeding. The appeal was allowed and the temple's original allotment restored.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.