- (1.) THE present writ petition has been filed thereby challenging the order dated 27-9-2006 passed by Deputy Director of Con-solidation, Hardoi in Revision No.529, Jagannath v. Umakant and others. Revision No.692, Smt. RamPyari v. Ramesh Chandra and others.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner sub­mits that the impugned order dated 27-9-2006 passed by Deputy Director of Consolidation, Hardoi is a non speaking order and no reason whatsoever has been given by the respondent No.1 while allowing the Revision Nos.529 and 692 as such the order passed by him is unrea­sonable and arbitrary, thus is liable to be quashed. I have heard Sri Anurag Narain, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.
(3.) IN brief factual matrix of the present case are to the effect that before the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Hardoi three revi­sions under section 48 of the Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 were filed namely:- (1) Revision No.529, Jagannath v. Umakant and others. (2) Revision No.692, Smt. Ram Pyari v. Ramesh Chandra and others. (3) Revision No.697, Amarnath v. Ram Asharey and others. ;