Krishna Murari, J. - (1.) Heard Sri R.S. Maurya, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Sri R.K. Tripathi appearing for the respondents.
(2.) The facts giving rise to the present dispute are that an area 25 acre of plot No. 122 belonging to respondent No. 2 was reserved for 'Sarvganik Khaliyan', in the statement of principles prepared under section 8-A of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act (for short 'the Act'). No objection was filed either by respondent No. 2 or by anybody else in this regard under section 9-A of the Act. However, respondent No. 2 later on filed an objection under section 20 of the Act claiming that the area reserved for Khaliyan was his original holding and may be allotted in his chak. The Consolidation Officer vide order dated 14.12.1973 dismissed the objection. Appeal filed by respondent No. 2 was dismissed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation on 10.1.1974. Feeling aggrieved, the respondent No. 2 filed revision which has been allowed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation vide order dated 15.11.1977
(3.) I have considered the argument advanced by learned Counsel for the parties and perused the records.;