Vikram Nath, J. - (1.) Heard Sri H.N. Sharma, Advocate on behalf of the petitioner and Sri Raj Kumar Jain, Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Rahul Jain on behalf of Respondent No. 4.
(2.) Even though there are large number of parties in the writ petition arrayed as respondents but by the order passed by Deputy Director of Consolidation the chaks of the petitioner and respondent No. 4 have been altered and no other person has been disturbed, therefore, with the consent of learned Counsel for the parties this Writ petition is being heard finally.
(3.) The submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that Deputy Director of Consolidation by the impugned order dated 23.2.2007 has allowed the revision filed by Respondent No. 4 only considering the claim of respondent No. 4 and without considering the case of the petitioner. Perusal of the order of Deputy Director of Consolidation clearly indicates that the claim and hardship of the petitioner have not been considered before allowing the revision filed by the respondent No. 4. Only for the reason that respondent No 4 has been allotted a chak which was far away from his private source of irrigation the revision was allowed. On this short question, this writ petition succeeds and is allowed.;