SHRI NARAYAN SHUKLA,J. - (1.) HEARD Mr S.K.. Mehrotra, learned Counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr. R.P. Shukla, learned Counsel for the opposite parties.
(2.) THE petitioners have challenged the order dated 18th of November, 2009, passed by Mr. J.P. Tewari, Deputy Director of Consolidation, Faizabad, on the ground that despite application for adjournment as petitioners' Counsel was busy in perform­ing the rituals on the event of death of his father, he proceeded to fix the matter just after two days. Since the position was the same on that very date also the Counsel was not available he proceeded to decide the matter on merit. The petitioners moved an applica­tion for transfer, therefore, treating the order as an exparte order, I hereby quash the same and remit the matter to the Collector, who is the District Deputy Director of Consoli­dation to hear the revision and decide the same after providing opportunity of hear­ing to the parties concerned.
(3.) MR . R.P. Shukla, learned Counsel for the opposite parties raised objection that by seeking adjournment the petitioners are interested to linger on the matter for one or the other reason, therefore, I hereby provide that the learned Counsels for the respective parties, who are being represented through their Counsels before this Court, shall appear before the District Deputy Director of Consolidation on 28th of Janu­ary, 2010 and without taking any adjourn­ment on any other ground they shall submit their stand. Accordingly the authority concerned shall decide the revision expeditiously. If any legal impediment is there with the authority on 28th of January, 2010 he shall postpone the matter for the next date and accordingly he shall conclude the hearing of the case by continuing with day-to-day hearing of the case.;