S. N. Singh, J. - (1.) This petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution arises out of consolidation proceedings. Since the matter has been decided on a technical point, it is not necessary to give detail facts. It appears before the consolidation authorities an objection was filed by the Petitioner claiming tenure holding's right in the disputed property. This objection of the Petitioner was rejected by the Consolidation Officer. Against the decision of the CO, an appeal was preferred by the Petitioner before the SO (C). The Petitioner had engaged a counsel before the CO and had filed a vakalatnama in favour of that counsel. The counsel who was appointed by the Petitioner before the CO preferred an appeal before the SO (C) without filing a fresh vakalatnama.
(2.) A preliminary objection was raised on behalf of the Gram Samaj that the appeal was not properly presented and reliance was placed on para. 55 of the Revenue Court Manual. This preliminary objection of the Gram Samaj was accepted by the SO (C) who dismissed the appeal as improperly presented. Against this decision a second appeal was filed before the Dy. Director (C). This second appeal was also dismissed for the same reason as given by the SO(C). Before the Dy. Director (C) it appears that a certified copy of the judgment Mahabir v/s. State of UP CMW No. 619 of 1959 D/ -10 -9 -1960 was filed. A mention of this decision has been made in the order of the Dy. Director (C), but the Dy. Director (C) did not decide the case following the decision of this Court on the objection of the Gram Samaj that the judgment not being a reported one could not be relied as a ruling. Against the decision of the Dy. Director (G) a revision was filed, but this revision was dismissed as not maintainable by the Director of Consolidation having been filed after the 8th of March 1963. Aggrieved with the orders of the consolidation authorities, the present writ petition has been filed.
(3.) In view of a recent Division Bench decision of this Court in Ram Singh v/s. Dy. Director (Consolidation)., 1970 AWR 838 the order of the Director of Consolidation dated 26 -7 -1963 is correct and calls for no interference.;