Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Sri Gaurav Sharma learned Counsel for the Respondent No. 4.
(2.) THE matter had been adjourned on two occasions to enable Sri Gaurav Sharma learned Counsel for the Respondent No. 4 to obtain his instructions. In view of the order passed by this Court on 30.3.2011 Sri Sharma has been able to obtain certified copies of the order sheet from the office of the Settlement Officer Consolidation indicating that the contesting Respondent was given an opportunity to adduce evidence at the stage of the Settlement Officer Consolidation. The said opportunity was availed and certain evidence was filed. Relying on the same the Settlement Officer Consolidation passed orders in favour of the contesting Respondent. The Petitioner assailed the said order and one of the grounds taken was that this additional evidence, the opportunity whereof was given to the contesting Respondent and was availed of, was not made known to the Petitioner who had no opportunity to rebut the said evidence which has been made the basis for passing the order of the Settlement Officer Consolidation. This ground was also taken as ground No. 11 in the memo of revision but the Deputy Director of Consolidation without entering into the aforesaid issue raised on behalf of the Petitioner has dismissed the same.
(3.) I have perused the certified copies that have been produced by Sri Gaurav Sharma and the same do not indicate that any opportunity was given to the Petitioner for rebutting the evidence which had been filed along with an application before the Settlement Officer Consolidation on 29.12.2009 on which date the judgment was reserved by him.;