- (1.) S. K. Singh, J. Heard Sri Namwar Singh, learned Advocate in support of this petition and Sri Anil Bhushan, learned Advocate who appeared for, the respondents.
(2.) CHALLENGE is to the order passed by the Deputy Director, Consolidation, by which revision filed by respondent was allowed and thereafter, the order of the Deputy Director, Consolidation by which application for recall filed by petitioner was rejected. For disposal of this petition, mention of facts in brief will suffice. An order of re-conciliation came to be passed which was challenged by the petitioner before the appellate authority who remanded the matter back to the Consolidation Officer for trial on merits. On filing revision by the respondent, he succeeded and the order being claimed to be ex parte, recall was filed and that was rejected and thus, this petition.
(3.) SUBMISSION of learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the Settlement Officer, Consolidation has recorded clear finding that alleged re-conciliation do not bear signature/thumb impression of the petitioner and at the same time, re-conciliation was never recorded by the Assistant Consolidation Officer and was never read to the parties and it was just a compromise filed before the Assistant Consolidation Officer and on that basis, order was got passed and it is on these findings, appeal was allowed, and the matter was remanded. SUBMISSION is that Deputy Director, Consolidation without recording any finding and without understanding the distinction between reconciliation and compromise has allowed the revision. In response to the aforesaid, learned Counsel for the respondents submits that if before the Assistant Consolidation Officer, compromise was filed and that has been properly verified, and the order has been passed by the Assistant Consolidation Officer and if that has been maintained by the Deputy' Director, Consolidation, then no exception can be taken to it.;