Hon’ble Satya Narain Agnihotri, J.—The instant Review Petition has been filed by the Lucknow Development Authority (herein after referred to as “L.D.A.”) against Smt. Saroj Rani and one other to review the order and judgment dated 15.12.2008 passed by coordinate Bench, whereby the writ petition No. 2889 of 1992 of review opposite party Smt. Saroj Rani was allowed to hand over the possession of property which was neither acquired nor requisitioned and to pay Rs. two lacs as damages.

2. The relevant facts for the disposal of this review petition are that writ petitioner Smt. Saroj Rani filed a writ petition No. above alleging that she had purchased 20 bighas land bearing Khasra Nos. 440, 448 situated in Village Aurangabad Khalsa from the earlier owner. Later on this Village was brought under consolidation of holding (here in after referred to as C.H.) proceedings and C.H. Form No. 23 was prepared. The area of the holding of writ petitioner was shown less than the actual holding in C.H. Form No. 23, against this writ petitioner preferred a consolidation case in the Court of consolidation officer and the same was dismissed by consolidation officer. Feeling aggrieved she filed an appeal No. 239 in the Court of Settlement Officer Consolidation which was decided in favour of writ petitioner and the matter was remanded back for disposal afresh. The matter was again prosecuted in the Court of consolidation officer and the consolidation officer after measurement, ordered to be recorded the holdings of writ petitioner 15 Bighas, 06 Biswa 06 Biswansies. This order was not complied with by the authorities of the opposite party No. 2, thats why the writ petitioner Smt. Saroj Rani submitted an application dated 27.4.1988 before consolidation officer, Lucknow for the implementation of the order dated 16.6.1982. Consolidation Officer, Lucknow issued an order for Amaldaramad on 27.4.1988. It is also contended by the review opposite party that the orders dated 16.6.1982 and 27.4.1988 passed by Consolidation Officer were not challenged by any person, thats why these both orders noted above became final. Consolidation proceedings concluded in the year 1985 with the publication of the notification under Section 52 of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act 1953.

3. It is also contended by the review opposite party Smt. Saroj Rani that the Consolidation Officer ordered that the area of opposite party Smt. Saroj Rani be recorded as 15 Bigha, 06 Biswa and 06 Bishwansi in New Gata No. 298, which was alloted to her after C.H. operation.

4. Heard Shri O.P. Srivastava, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Shobhit Mohan Shukla, learned counsels for the Lucknow Development Authority and Shri Sudeep Seth, learned counsel for the review opposite party/writ petitioner and gone through the entire record with the judgement and order passed by this Court dated 15.12.2008.

5. As per the submissions and averments of L.D.A., the Writ Petition No. 2889 of 1992 (M/B) Smt. Saroj Rani v. Lucknow Development Authority and another was disposed of by this Court ignoring the fact that the petitioner herself averred in her petition’s paragraph No. 5 that the Consolidation Authorities alloted land to the petitioner new Gata No. 298 measuring 13 Bighas and 08 Biswansies after reducing the land from 20 Bighas. Thus it is evident from this averment that the Consolidation Authorities alloted only 13 Bighas and 08 Biswansies land to the writ petitioner Smt. Saroj Rani, but the Court oversight this fact and passed the judgment dated 15.12.2008, ordering to review petitioner/writ opposite party to hand over 2 Bigha, 5 Bishwa and 18 Bishwansi rest land and compensation of Rs. 2 lacs for use and occupation of the land.

6. Writ petitioner pleaded that the opposite party/review petitioner acquired only 13 Bighas and 8 Biswansies land and is using 2 Bighas, 5 Bishwas and 18 Bishwansies land without acquiring or requisitioning.

7. It is admitted fact that the opposite party/review petiti