- (1.) BINOD Kumar Roy, J. The petitioner pray to quash the Revisional Order dated 17th October, 1980 passed by the Joint Director of Consolidation, Varanasi (Respondent No. 1) in Revision No. 3911 remitting back Case Nos. 1823 and 1824 of 1973 to the Consolidation Officer, Pindra Circle, district Varanasi (Respondent No. 3 ).
(2.) MR. Sankatha Rai, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, contended that the Revisional Authority has committed an error of law in remitting back the case to the original authority for taking fresh evidence of the parties without assigning any reason for doing so and accordingly the impugned order is liable to be set aside. Mr. S. N. Singh, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of Respondents 4 and 5 after some arguments very fairly accepts the factual position that really no reason has been assigned why the case is being remitted back to the Consolidation Officer for a trial de novo. Perusal of the impugned revisional order does not show why the case was remitted to the original authority for a trial de novo. I thus accept the arguments of Mr. Rai and remit back Revision No. 3911 for fresh disposal in accordance with law.
(3.) IN view of the fair stand taken by Mr. Singh I make no order as to cost. Let a writ of certiorari issue accordingly. Order accordingly. . .;