M. P. Singh, J. - (1.) Heard counsel.
(2.) Against the order of remand dated 11-11-87 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation the Present Writ Petition has been filed.
(3.) Paragraph 10 of the revisional order dated 11-11-87 indicates that the orders of the Consolidation Officer and the settlement officer consolidation have been set aside and the case has been remanded to the consolidation officer to decide the case on merits after giving full opportunity to the parties to lead evidence. I see no justification to interfere at this stage because nothing has been finally decided. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has claimed sole tenancy right but the observation of the Deputy Director of Consolidation in the body of judgment indicates that he is treating the case of the petitioner as if he is claiming co-tenancy right. This observation, if any, in the body of the judgment will have no effect on the merits of the case. The consolidation officer will decide the matter without being prejudiced by any observation made in the order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation. The Consolidation Officer will decide the matter on the basis of the pleadings and the evidence on the record.;