Krishna Murari, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.
(2.) An objection under Section 9 - A (2) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was filed by the father of petitioner nos. 1 and 2 and petitioner nos.3 and 4 inter alia on the ground that the land in dispute was let out to them by the then Zamindar prior to Zamindari Abolition and hence they became sirdars and thereafter bhoomidhars and the same has wrongly been recorded in the name of Gaon Sabha. The Consolidation Officer by the order referring various evidences adduced on behalf of the petitioners allowed the objection. The order was challenged by the Gaon Sabha by filing an appeal. The Settlement Officer Consolidation finding that there was absolutely no evidence available on record of the Consolidation Officer, as the same were taken back by the petitioners after the decision by the Consolidation Officer on 4.11.1989, and in the absence of any evidence on record the claim of the petitioners was not liable to be allowed. It is to be taken note of that the petitioners failed to produce the evidence, which was alleged to have filed before the Consolidation Officer and later on taken back by him. The Settlement Officer Consolidation also held that the objection was belated and filed after the notification under Section 52 of the Act, hence the order passed thereon was without jurisdiction. The petitioner went up in revision. During the pendency of the revision an application was filed that an expert opinion be called for with respect to thumb impression on the application alleged to have been filed by the petitioners for taking back the evidence, as it was moved by some impostor. The Deputy Director of Consolidation vide order dated 31.12.2010, impugned in this petition, has dismissed the application. The order is interlocutory in nature and the revision is still pending disposal on merits, it is always open to the petitioner to file another copy of documentary evidence, which are in the form of revenue record, before the Deputy Director of Consolidation. In case the petitioner files the aforesaid documents, the same shall be taken into consideration by the Deputy Director of Consolidation while deciding the revision.
(3.) With the aforesaid observation the writ petition stands dismissed.;