SUNITA AGARWAL, J.

1. Heard Sri Sudhanshu Pandey learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Anil Kumar Tiwari learned counsel for respondent No. 5. The counsel of Gaon Sabha is absent.

2. The orders impugned in the present petition are the order dated 31.10.2017 passed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation as also the order dated 11.12.2017 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation whereby the restoration application filed by the respondent No. 5/appellant was allowed and the previous order dated 19.4.2017 passed on the merit of the appeal was recalled. The revision filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 31.10.2017 has been dismissed on the ground of maintainability being against the interlocutory order. Before filing of the present petition, it appears that by an order dated 10.1.2018, the Settlement Officer Consolidation had decided the appeal filed by respondent No. 5 afresh on merits.

3. By means of the amendment application, the order dated 10.1.2018 is also under challenge on the ground of being without jurisdiction.

4. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Consolidation Authorities do not have power to review their own dec