RAJES KUMAR, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri Ayub Khan, learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appears on be­half of respondent No. 1 and Sri U.K. Gos­wami, learned Counsel appears on behalf of respondent No. 2.
(2.) BY means of the present writ peti­tion, petitioner is challenging the order dated 26.4.2008 passed by Deputy Director of Consolidation, Bulandshahr, by which the revision filed by the respondent has been allowed. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that by the impugned order the chak of the petitioner has been disturbed without considering the objection of the petitioner, which has been accepted by Consolidation Officer and without dealing with the findings recorded by him. He further submitted that in the impugned order, Deputy Director of Consolidation has only considered the plea of the respon­dent and allowed the revision.
(3.) I have perused the impugned or­der. In the impugned order, Deputy Direc­tor of Consolidation has only considered the plea of the respondent, Raj Pal and has neither considered the objection of the petitioner, which was considered by the Con­solidation Officer in its order nor has con­sidered the findings recorded by the Con­solidation Officer.;