JAHAN SINGH Vs. D D C BULANDSHAHR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) THE contention raised is that the revision was entertained on behalf of a third person, that too even after a considerable period and without any plausible explanation. Learned counsel for the petitioner therefore submits that the impugned order dated 30.11.2010 deserves to be set aside on the short ground alone.

(3.) THE Deputy Director of Consolidation has held that the restoration itself had become infructuous and the Settlement Officer, Consolidation had no authority to restore the matter as the revision filed against the original order had already been decided on 2.9.1994. This finding recorded by the Deputy Director of Consolidation in the opinion of the Court is in consonance with the doctrine of finality and the principles of merger.