VIVEK KUMAR BIRLA,J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.
(2.) Present writ petition has been filed seeking quashing of the impugned judgments and orders dated 12.4.2017 and 24.7.2013 passed by respondent no. 1 filed as Annexures 6 and 4 respectively to the writ petition.
(3.) Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the order impugned dated 24.7.2013 whereby the matter has been remanded back to the Settlement Officer, Consolidation was ex-parte against the petitioner as he was not impleaded as one of the respondents in the revision as well as it is clear from the memo of revision. In such view of the matter, the order dated 24.7.2013 being ex-parte to the petitioner is liable to be set aside. It was next submitted that for this reason the restoration application filed by the petitioner has also been incorrectly rejected by the impugned order dated 12.4.2017. Therefore, the submission is that the orders are liable to be set aside and the petitioner is liable to be heard on merits. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also sought to challenge the order dated 24.7.2013 on merits.;