Sabhajeet Yadav, J. - (1.) VIDE detail judgment and order dated 25.3.2010 passed by me, I have dismissed the above noted writ petition by placing reliance upon certain decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court and a decision rendered by me in Writ Petition No. 11825 of 2010 (Uma Shanker and Ors. v. Deputy Director of Consolidation and Ors.) decided on 18.3.2010 referred in the judgment dated 25.3.2010 sought to be reviewed by the present application. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has neither perused the aforesaid decisions referred in the order sought to be reviewed nor the decision rendered by this Court on 18.3.2010 in Writ Petition No. 11825 of 2010 (Uma Shanker and Ors. v. Deputy Director of Consolidation and Ors.) wherein, I have discussed the content and scope of the provisions of Section 48 of U.P.C.H. Act in extenso, has placed before me.
(2.) FROM the perusal of the order dated 26.2.2010 which was impugned in the writ petition, gave rise cause of action of instant review application. It is clear that illegalities which were committed by the subordinate consolidation authorities were of such a nature which could not be rectified by either in individual objections or in appeals filed by aggrieved parties or by him in revisions, as such, finding no alternative, Deputy Director of Consolidation has cancelled the entire consolidation proceeding of the village in question from the stage of valuation of plots of the village in question and directed the Assistant Consolidation Officer to make fresh valuation of the plots of the village and after fresh determination of the valuation of plots Assistant Consolidation Officer directed for preparing fresh provisional consolidation scheme, under which the petitioners and other aggrieved persons would have opportunity to file individual objections, appeals and revisions. Therefore, in my considered opinion, no fault can be found in the earlier order passed by me. The review application stands dismissed.;