ANJANI KUMAR MISHRA, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri V.D. Ojha, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the state - respondents. None has appeared for the contesting respondents.
(2.) THE petition arises out of proceedings for allotment of chaks and is directed against the order dated 26.9.1984 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, respondent no. 1.
(3.) THE petitioner is holder of chak no. 314 while the respondents 2 and 3 are joint holders of chak no. 208. The parties are co -tenure holders, the share of the petitioner in the original holding being 2/3 while that of the respondents 2 and 3 was 1/3. The objection under section 20 was filed by the contesting respondents 2 and 3. It has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was not a party to the said objection. The Consolidation Officer by his order reduced the number of chaks proposed to the contesting respondents from 2 to 1 and in the process the number of chaks of the petitioner was increased from 2 to 3. On coming to know of the order, the petitioners are alleged to have filed an appeal, which was allowed by the Settlement Officer, Consolidation. The order of the Consolidation Officer was reversed and the parties were relegated to the position as existing at the stage of the Assistant Consolidation Officer. Aggrieved by the appellate order, the contesting respondents preferred a revision, which has been allowed by the impugned order, as a consequence whereof, the parties have been relegated to the position as existing in pursuance of the order passed by the Consolidation Officer.;