R.M.Sahai, J. - (1.) BY this petition correctness of view taken by Deputy Director of Consolidation, that the petitioner was not entitled to file a competent revision the earlier one having been dismissed as incompetent, as section 48 of U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act does not contemplate two revisions, has been assailed.
(2.) ON 20th April, 1971 when the first revision was taken up for hearing objection was raised that application for substitution filed by petitioner to bring on record heirs of Reazullah was misconceived as he had died during pendency of appeal and his heirs had already been brought on record. And as the revision was filed against dead person it was liable to be dismissed. The objection was accepted and it was held that as the revision has been filed against a dead person It could not be entertained. Petitioner, therefore, filed another proper revision but the Deputy Director Consolidation dismissed It as two revisions were not permissible. Any proceeding against a dead person is void. It is non est in law. Non entertaining of revision as it was filed against dead person did not preclude petitioner from filing a competent revision. The order did not operate as res-judicata. In the result this petition succeeds and is allowed. The order dated 24-9-1971 passed by Deputy Director of Consolidation is quashed. He is directed to decide the revision on merits in accordance with law. Parties shall bear their own costs. Petition allowed.;