Rajiv Sharma, J. - (1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, the writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage itself.
(3.) Undisputed facts of the case are that on initiation of consolidation proceedings, objections were filed under Section 21 of the Consolidation of Holdings Act, but the Consolidation Officer, by means of the order dated 3.2.1996 decided the objections by a common order, without affording opportunity of hearing to the tenure holders of various plots. On perusal of the order, it reflects that the Consolidation Officer has not applied its mind to the objections of the respective tenure holders. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the Settlement Officer Consolidation and the Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal by a non-speaking order dated 13.8.1996, which reads as under:- ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMITTED]... ;