Hon’ble Ashok Bhushan, J.—Heard Counsel for the parties.

2. These two writ petitions having been filed against the same orders of Deputy Director of Consolidation and the Settlement Officer of Consolidation, have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

3. The petitioners by these writ petitions have prayed for quashing the order dated 25th November, 2004 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation dismissing the revision filed by the petitioners against the order dated 10th September, 2004 passed by Settlement Officer of Consolidation. The facts of Writ Petition No. 253 of 2005 are being noted for deciding both the writ petitions.

4. Brief facts of the case necessary for deciding the writ petitions are; during consolidation proceedings, the petitioner was allotted Chak No. 30, respondent No. 3 was allotted chak No. 246, respondent No. 4 was allotted chak No. 187 and respondent No. 5 was allotted Chak No. 186. The petitioner as well as respondents No. 3, 4 and 5 were original tenure holder of Plot No. 267 area 1.800, Plot No. 93 area 0.170 and Plot No. 243 area 0.0221. The chaks were proposed by the Assistant Consolidation Officer. An objection