VINAY KUMAR Vs. DY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Anup Swaroop Srivastava, counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) THE writ petition has been filed against the order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 9.12.2013 by which the revision filed by the contesting respondents has been allowed and the order of the Settlement Officer, Consolidation dated 22.7.2011 has been set aside and the order of the Consolidation Officer dated 21.8.1977 has been maintained.

(3.) THE counsel for the petitioner states that the Deputy Director of Consolidation in the operative portion of the order dated 9.12.2013 has maintained the order of the Consolidation officer dated 21.8.1977 as such remanding the case for decision by the Settlement Officer, Consolidation is a futile exercise as the Settlement Officer, Consolidation may not be able to pass any fresh order reversing the order of the Consolidation Officer dated 21.8.1977. He further submits that the respondents have notice of the proceeding before the Settlement Officer, Consolidation as such delay condonation application as well as recall application filed by them were not maintainable and it has been rightly rejected by the Settlement Officer, Consolidation.