S.N. Singh, J. - (1.) THE dispute in the present case is in respect of plot Nos. 471 area 16 biswa, 4.73 area 12 biswa 16 dhur and 474 area 8 biswa 9 dhur.
(2.) BABU Nandan and others filed an objection claiming to be the sirdars of these plots. This was registered as one objection. The other objection was filed by Ram Ker in respect of the same three plots. It was registered as another objection. As a matter of fact the two objections were in respect of the three disputed plots and should have been considered to be one case. Since these objections were treated as two cases after the decision of the Consolidation Officer two appeals were filed before the Settlement Officer (Consolidation). The Settlement Officer (Consolidation) allowed the appeals and aggrieved with the decision of the Settlement Officer (Consolidation) two second appeals were filed by the Petitioners. One appeal was complete in all respects and all the relevant copies of judgments had been filed. In another appeal the copy of the judgment of the Consolidation Officer was not filed. At the hearing of the second appeal a preliminary objection was raised that one appeal was incompetent became all the judgments of the subordinate authorities had not been filed. Reliance was placed on para. 161 of the Revenue Court Manual. The Dy. Director accepted the preliminary objection and dismissed one of the appeals and dismissed the other appeal on the ground of res judicata.
(3.) THE Petitioners preferred a revision before the Director which was dismissed as not maintainable. However, the decision of the revision as not maintainable will not affect the claim of the, Petitioners in the present writ petition.;