ORDER

K.P. Singh, J. - Shorn of unnecessary details it appears that the petitioners are allottees of the land declared as surplus belonging to opposite party No. 4. Previously the disputed land was declared as surplus land of the opposite party No. 4 in the present writ petition, namely Sirish Chandra Pandey. Thereafter the opposite party No. 4 Sirish Chandra Pandey succeeded in appeal and the disputed land has been included within the ceiling limit of the land held by the opposite party No. 4 in the present writ petition. When the disputed land was included within the ceiling limit of the tenure holder Sirish Chandra Pandey he applied for restitution of possession which has been granted to him. Thereafter the petitioner filed an application on 14-11-1983 complaining that the orders dated 19-5-1983 and 28-7-1983 were passed against the petitioners without hearing them. The aforesaid application has been rejected by the prescribed authority through his judgment dated 20-5-1986. Against the aforesaid order the petitioners preferred an appeal which has also been dismissed as is evident from the order of the appellate authority dated 13-11-1987.

2. Before me the learned counsel for the