Ashok Bhushan, J. - (1.) By this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order, dated 30-3-2001 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation as well as the order, dated 27-5-1999 passed by the Settlement Officer of Consolidation and the order, dated 16-3-1999 passed by the Consolidation Officer.
(1.) In view of the nature of the order which is to be passed in the writ petition no notice has been issued to the respondent Nos. 4 to 7.
(2.) From the facts given in the writ petition it appears that an order dated 13-10-1982 was passed by the Consolidation Officer under rule 109 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Rules in favour of Chokat, father of respondent Nos. 4 and 5 which order was subsequently set aside by the Assistant Settlement Officer of Consolidation vide, order, dated 29-3-1988 passed in the appeal filed by the petitioner. The petitioner's case is that the aforesaid order was maintained in the revision. The Consolidation Officer subsequently passed an order dated 16-5-1998 and 11-3-1999 against which the respondent No. 5 filed a restoration application to recall the said orders along with stay application before the Consolidation Officer. On the stay application dated 16-3-1999 an interim order was passed by the Consolidation Officer on 16-3-1999 to the effect that the ex parte orders, dated 16-5-1998 and 11-3-1999 are stayed till the disposal of the restoration application. The petitioner filed an appeal against the order, dated 16-3-1999 which appeal has been dismissed by the Settlement Officer of Consolidation vide, his order, dated 27-5-1999. Against the order, dated 27-5-1999 a revision was filed by the petitioner which, too, has been rejected on 30-3-2001. The petitioner has come up before this Court challenging the aforesaid orders. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the order, dated 13-10-1982 passed under Rule 109 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Rules in favour of the respondents' father was set aside.;