RAJES KUMAR, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri Rajesh Chandra Gupta, learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel ap­pears on behalf of respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3, Sri Ayub Khan appears on behalf of re­spondent No. 4 and Sri V.K. Singh appears, on behalf of respondent No. 5.
(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Bulandshahr vide order dated 23.8.2008 has allowed the revision of the respondent No. 4 without dealing with the case of the petitioner and without consider­ing the findings recorded by the Consoli­dation Officer and the Settlement Officer of Consolidation. Sri Ayub Khan, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 4 submitted that the Settlement Officer, of Consolidation while allowing the appeal of the petitioner has not considered the find­ings of the Consolidation Officer and the case of respondent No. 4. He submitted that on the facts and circumstances, it would be appropriate that the matter may be remanded back to the Settlement Officer of Consolidation to decide the appeal afresh after considering the objection, finding recorded by the Consolidation Offi­cer, the case of the petitioner and the re­spondent No. 4 in accordance to law.
(3.) HAVING heard the learned Counsel for the parties, I have perused the im­pugned order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 23.8.2008.;