S. N. SRIVASTAVA, J.

( 1 ) BY an order dated 30th July, 2003, Assistant Settlement Officer Consolidation remanded the matter to Consolidation Officer to decide the case on merits in accordance with law. The said order was affirmed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation in revision by an order dated 20. 10. 2003. These two orders are impugned in the present writ petition.

( 2 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners urged that the appeal preferred by the contesting respondents was not maintainable inasmuch as it was filed after notification under Section 52 (1)of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act (hereinafter called as the act) dated 8. 2. 1986 and the appeal cannot be heard and decided on merits as it was not pending on the date of publication of notification under Section 52 (1) of the Act. Learned counsel further urged that the order, considering the case of contesting respondents on merit and remanding the matter to be considered on merits by Consolidation Officer, was without jurisdiction.

( 3 ) LEARNED counsel for the caveator urged that actually appellate authority rightly passed an order in accordance with law on merits. He further urged that appeal was filed along with

Click Here to Read the rest of this document