R.S.Narula, J.

1. Leaving out all the factual details the adoption of which course does not appear to be unjustified in this case, the brief relevant facts which led to the filing of the writ petition against the dismissal of which by a learned Single Judge of this Court, the present appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent has been filed, are these: By the impugned orders, dated May 1 and July 25, 1964 (collectively marked Annexure A to the writ petition), the Additional Director Consolidation of Holdings Punjab Hissar allowed the application of Mange and Risal Singh (respondents Nos. 2 and 3) under Section 42 of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act (50 of 1948) (hereinafter called the Act), and made certain changes in the repartition of village Petwar, tahsil Hansi, district Hissar. As stated in paragraph 2 of the written statement of the Additional Director Consolidation of Holdings, Punjab Hissar in reply to the writ petition repartition of the village was published on March 9, 1954, under Sub-section (1) of Section 21 and the same was confirmed on April 17, 1954, under Section 21 (2) of the Act. The Additional Director has al