Hari Swarup, J. - (1.) THROUGH this petition the order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation dismissing as not maintainable the application for review of the order pass ed in Revision is being challenged. Admit tedly there is no specific provision in the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, here inafter referred to as the Act, conferring on the Deputy Director of Consolidation the power to review his judgment Learned counsel contends that Section 41 of the Act confers such power.
(2.) SECTION 41 reads as under. "Unless otherwise expressly provided by or under this Act, the provisions of Chapters IX and X of the U. P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 shall apply to all proceedings including appeal and applications under this Act." Chapter X of the Land Revenue Act gives the power to the Board of Revenue to review its judgment There is, however, no provi sion therein regarding review of orders by authorities under the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act In our opinion Sec. 41 of the Act only makes applicable the provisions of Chap ters K and X of the U. P. Land Revenue Act to proceedings initiated under the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, including pro ceedings of appeal and revision. Once the proceedings are initiated under this Act, the procedure Lald down hi Chapters K and X shall apply. Section 41, however, does not authorise the initiation of proceedings not contemplated or authorised by the Act. The power of review has to be specifically con ferred and unless there is a provision in the Act permitting initiation of such proceedings the question of applicability of procedure Laid down in Chapters DC and X of the U. P. Land Revenue Act does not arise. In the case of Qadam Singh v. Ganga Saran, 1960 All LJ 836 this Court had taken the view that no review lie. We are also of the same view.
(3.) THE petition is accordingly dismissed. Petition dismissed.;