S. R. Misra, J.

1. This is another series of oases where the litigant has come to this Court on account of arbitrary exercise of discretion conferred on an Authority namely, the Deputy Director of Consolidation, constituted under the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act') under Section 48 of the Act, where he can go into the questions of fact as well.

2. Briefly stated, the facts of the present case are that petitioner filed an objection u/Sec. 9 (2) of the Act before the Asstt. Consolidation Officer, Jalaun. The said objection was decided in favour of the petitioner. On appeal, the Settlement Officer (Consolidation) remanded the case back to the Consolidation Officer against which two revisions were filed one by the petitioner and the other by the respondent allottees, the case was sent back to the Consolidation Officer. The Consolidation Officer however, decided the matter in favour of the allottees and rejected the claim of the petitioner by order dated 28-4-1980. Aggrieved, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Settlement Officer (Consolidation), Oral at Jalaun being appeal no. 23/434 of 1979-80 u/Sec. 11 (1) of the Act. During