Present petition arises out of proceedings under Sections 20/21 of the U. P. Consolidation of Hold ings Act, for short the Act, and is directed against the judgment and order dated 14-12-1993 passed by Respondent No. 1 whereby revision filed by the contesting Respondents No. 2 to 6 was allowed.

2. It appears that the Assistant Con solidation Officer proposed to allot Chak No. 178 to the petitioner and chak No. 694 to the contesting respondents. The respondents filed objection that they were entitled to allotment of chak No. 178. The objection filed by contesting respondents was contested by the petitioner. Parties produced evidence in support of their cases. The Consolidation Officer upheld the claim of the petitioner and rejected the objection filed by the contesting respon dents by his judgment and order dated 27-4-1992. Challenging the validity of the said order, an appeal was filed by the con testing respondents before the Settlement Officer Consolidation. The Settlement Officer Consolidation also dismissed the appeal and confirmed the order passed by the Consolidation Officer by his judgment and order dated 30-6-1992. Thereafter, the contesting respondents file