JUDGMENT K.C. Agrawal, ACJ. - Puttu Lal, respondent No. 4, filed a revision No. 937 of 1986 before the Deputy Director of Consolidation. The said revision was allowed and the order of the Settlement Officer (Consolidation) with regard to Chak No. 224 was entered. The sole ground taken by the petitioner against the said respondent Puttu Lal is that as the petitioner had neither been impleaded as a party nor was heard, therefore, that decision of the Deputy Director of Consolidation was erroneous and against the principles of natural justice. 2. To the aforesaid, plot, respondent No. 4 in whose favour the revision was allowed, has conceded. 3. Consequently, the writ petition, succeeds and allowed The Judgement of the Deputy Director of Consolidation in so far as it is in favour of Prabhu Dayal is set aside. The Deputy Director of Consolidation may decide the revision on merits after affording opportunity to the parties.