S.K.Singh, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Rai, learned advocate in support of this petition and Sri Tripathi, learned Counsel who appeared for the private respondents.
(2.) Proceedings are under section 20 of UPCH Act which relates to allotment of chak between the parties. Needless to say that both parties can never be satisfied and it is not possible to satisfy both parties in its entirety and therefore, the concern of the Court should be that whether petitioner has suffered any prejudice calling for interference or not.
(3.) Submission of learned Counsel for petitioner is that petitioner No. 1 was although made party in the revision but with wrong address and so far as other petitioners are concerned, they have not been made party. The Deputy Director of Consolidation at an earlier stage remanded the matter, upon which appeal filed by respondents was dismissed but that was not taken into consideration by the Deputy Director of Consolidation while reversing the Judgment. Submission is that on various grounds so taken in the writ petition, petitioner has suffered serious prejudice and therefore, judgment of revisional Court needs interference.;