Krishna Murari, J. - (1.) Heard Sri S.K. Pundir, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Sri R.K. Yadav appearing for contesting respondents.
(2.) Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts relevant for the purposes of the case are that dispute between the parties with respect to shares in the land in dispute travelled upto Deputy Director of Consolidation in revision. During pendency of revision, parties entered into compromise and according the terms of compromise was filed before the Deputy Director of Consolidation on 22.8.2006. However, on the same day judgment was delivered by the Deputy Director of Consolidation dismissing the revision filed by the petitioners. The Deputy Director of Consolidation refused to entertain the compromise and pass order in terms thereof on the ground that final judgment has already been delivered.
(3.) It has been pointed out by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that by the compromise which has been filed as Annexure-'l' to the writ petition, they have accepted the shares claimed by contesting respondents. However, certain modification has been made in the shares of the petitioner.;