S.K. Singh, J. - (1.) Heard Counsel for the parties.
(2.) By means of this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the judgment of the Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 27.4.1995 by which the revision filed by the respondent No. 3 has been allowed and the judgment dated 15.10.1997 by which the restoration application filed by the petitioner has been dismissed.
(3.) For the purpose of disposal of this writ petition the facts in detail will not be required to be mentioned and thus brief narration will suffice. Proceedings relate to section 9-A(2) of the U.P.C.H. Act which relates to the adjudication of the rights/title of the parties. Against the basic year entry objection filed by the opposite party claiming co-tenancy rights was allowed by the Consolidation Officer but on appeal filed by the petitioner the judgment of the Consolidation Officer was set aside and the appeal was allowed by the judgment dated 31.10.1972. Matter was taken by the respondent No. 3 to the revisional Court and thereafter to this Court and ultimately after remand of the matter by judgment dated 27.4.1995 revision filed by the respondent No. 3 was allowed and the restoration filed by the petitioner, referred above was dismissed. It is thus two orders of the Deputy Director of Consolidation are under challenge in this petition. Rival claim of parties as pleading stands, can be gathered from details as mentioned in the order of Courts below. In the light of the rival claims the Consolidation Officer accepted the contention of the opposite party to which the Settlement Officer Consolidation differed but the Deputy Director of Consolidation again by allowing the revision of the respondent No. 3 has restored the order of the Consolidation Officer.;