Hon’ble Ashok Bhushan, J.—This Division Bench has been constituted to consider following two questions referred to it :

“(i) Whether an order passed in appeal under section 11 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act by the Settlement Officer Consolidation deciding the appeal finally by setting aside the order of the [Settlement Officer Consolidation]1 and remanding the matter to the Consolidation Officer is an interlocutory order within the meaning of section 48 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act and revision is barred against such order under section 48.

(ii) Whether the law down in Ajab Singh and others v. Jt. Director of Consolidation and others, 1996 RD 104, Rajbir v. Dy. Director of Consolidation, 1999 (90) RD 313, Rajit Ram Singh and others v. Mahadev Singh and others, 2002 (93) RD 224, lay down the correct law.”

2. Brief facts of the case, which are necessary to be noted for deciding the above two questions, are; proceedings under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 were started in the village in which objections under Section 9-B of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 were filed by respondent No. 2. The said objections were allowed by orde