(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the contesting respondent no. 6 and learned Standing Counsel representing respondent nos. 1, 2, 3 and 10.
(2.) Grievance of the petitioner is that the Settlement Officer of Consolidation has illegally allowed the substitution application on the same day of its filing, without giving opportunity of hearing to the present petitioner.
(3.) Record reveals that, during pendency of the appeal, a substitution application dtd. 17/2/2021 along with delay condonation application have been filed by the heirs and legal representatives of appellant Munir-ud-deen with an averment that he has died six months before, therefore, his name may be deleted and in his place names of his sons namely Mohd. Shafi, Mohd. Rahis, Mohd. Ishaq, Mohd. Rafiq, Khushi, Mohammad and Nafees Mohd. may be ordered to be substituted. Aforesaid substitution application along with delay condonation application was entertained on the same day by the Settlement Officer of Consolidation, who has jotted in the margin of the application allowing the substitution application and issued notices to the parties fixing 3/3/2021. At subsequent stage, present petitioner has filed objection dtd. 17/3/2021. The objection field by the petitioner was rejected by the Settlement Officer of Consolidation vide order dtd. 22/12/2021. Having being aggrieved with the orders passed by the Settlement Officer of Consolidation, present petitioner has preferred a revision before the Deputy Director of Consolidation which was dismissed as well affirming the order passed by the Settlement Officer of Consolidation. Being aggrieved petitioner has filed instant writ petition assailing orders of Settlement Officer of Consolidation (respondent no. 2) and Deputy Director of Consolidation (respondent no. 1).