S.K. Singh, J. - (1.) Heard the argument of Sri Anil Bhushan, learned Counsel for the petitioner in revision of list.
(2.) Challenge in this petition is the judgment passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation by which, revision filed by petitioner was dismissed and variance of share as was made by appellate authority from the share so given by the judgment of Consolidation Officer was maintained.
(3.) Submission of learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the Consolidation Officer rightly decided the share of parties on the basis of Khewat entries which was wrongly varied by the appellate authority without assigning any reason and the Deputy Director of Consolidation by making wrong observation that it was argued on behalf of revisionist that the share is to be decided in the light of the pedigree, dismissed the revision. Submission is that argument/concession was never made on behalf of the revisionist which is clear from the affidavit filed by Sri. Ranjit Singh, Advocate dated 16.7.1975 which has been annexed along with the writ petition. Submission is that as the Deputy Director of Consolidation dismissed the revision on wrong premises, matter needs fresh attention by him.;