S.K. Singh, J. - (1.) Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Counsel who appeared for the respondents.
(2.) Challenge in this petition is the judgment of the Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 3.2.1996 by which the petitioners' revision has been dismissed and at the same time the revision filed by the respondent No. 2 has been allowed.
(3.) Proceedings relate to section 20 of the U.P.C.H. Act which is in respect to the adjustment of the chak. Petitioner happens to be chak holder No. 207 and the respondent No. 2 happens to be chak holder No. 305 which has been allotted to them at the stage of Assistant Consolidation Officer. Against the proposed allotment both parties filed their objections which was disposed of by the Consolidation Officer upon which both parties went to the appellate Court who also dismissed their appeal upon which both parties came to the revisional Court and now this time the opposite Party No. 2 succeed and petitioner failed and thus the petitioner is before this Court.;