JUDGMENT K. P. Singh, J. - By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have challenged the order of the Consolidation Officer dated 1-9-1988 whereby the petitioners prayer for adducing oral evidence in the case has been rejected. My attention has been drawn to the order contained in annexure 'T' attached to the supplementary affidavit wherein it has been indicated that 16-9-1988 was the date fixed for adducing documentary evidence and argument in the case. 2. In this writ petition, it has been alleged in paragraph 10 thereof that the order dated 1-9-1988 was passed without hearing the counsel for the petitioners and that the aforesaid order is clearly in violation of the principles of natural justice. 3. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order at this stage. However, I make it clear in the ends of justice that if the petitioners' prayer for adducing oral evidence has been rejected without hearing the counsel for the petitioners the orders in law would be bad and it would be proper for the Consolidation Officer to a afford an opportunity to the petitioner to lead oral evidence in the case. Since the contention raised on behalf of the petitioners centres round the question of fact, I think it proper to direct the petitioners to approach the Consolidation Officer hereafter and make another application for adducing oral evidence in the case. I have no hesitation that if the Consolidation Officer had passed the order on 1-9-1988 without hearing the counsel for the petitioners, he would hear the counsel as well as the petitioners. Rather in the ends of justice, he would allow an opportunity to the petitioners to lead oral evidence in the case. 4. With the above observations, this writ petition is finally disposed of. 5. A copy of this order may be given to the learned counsel for the petitioners on payment of necessary charges within 24 hours.