Sudhir Agarwal, J.: -

1. Heard learned counsels for parties and perused the record.

2. It is contended that Deputy Director of Consolidation (hereinafter referred to as "DDC") has interfered with the orders passed by the Consolidation Officer and Settlement Officer (Consolidation) in respect to allotment of chak in utter violation of guidelines laid down in Section 19 of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 1953") and also without finding any flaw with the orders passed by authorities below by recording his view.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner very vehemently argued and raised the issue of jurisdiction of DDC in interfering with the concurrent decisions of the authorities below. Thus, it would be appropriate first to examine the scope of revisional power, to be exercised by DDC, under Section 48 of Act, 1953.

4. The Scheme of the statute contemplates a tentative plan, inviting objection from stake-holder, i.e. tenure holder, and, after considering the same, finalization of plan, i.e., allotment of Chaks. Thereagainst appellate power has been conferred upon SOC under Section 21(2) of Act 1953. The power which is exercised by DDC, is terme