B. DIKSHIT, J. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 26-4-1989 passed by Deputy Director of Consolidation in exercise of revisional jurisdiction hereby he set aside the order of Consolidation Of ficer (2) Basti and Settlement Officer, Con solidation and allotted plot No. 258 of vil lage Dhaurhara Mayparsadi Khas, Tappa Karhi, Pargana Rasoolpur, Tehsil Dumarrya Ganj, district Basti (present Sidharth Nagar) to Jagdish Prasad and others, op posite parties. An area of 3 biswa 10 dhoprs of said plot No. 258 was reserved for drying clothes by washermen of the village together with plot No,. 216 area 3 biswa reserved for washing of clothes by Con solidation Officer. This reservation was upheld by Settlement Officer Consolida tion, Gorakhpur, Camp Officer Dumariyaganj, Basti while disposing of ap peal by order dated 22-4-1988. 2. Learned counsel for petitioner ar gued that the washermen of the village were entitled for reservation of land for drying clothes and as their case fell within the ambit of G. O. No. C- 55/g-437/76 dated 21st August, 1980, the petitioners were en titled for land reserved for drying of clothes and the Deputy Director of Consolidation while allowing the revision erred in depriv ing the petitioners from reservation of land for drying clothes. 3. None has appeared on behalf of op posite party. 4. The relevant extract of G. O. No. C-55/g-437/76 dated 21st August, 1980 as quoted at page 54 paragraphs 178-Ka and 78-Aa of Uttar Pradesh Jot Chakbandi Manual reads as under: - @hindi"^-55/^-437/76, TPt 1980 T I ^ JIR] Bafati Ansari v. State of U. P and Others. 395 -55/^ft 437/76 fto 21 1980 178-3t 5. There is no dispute that washermen are living in the village. As washermen are living in the village and State Government has considered reservation of land for washermen to be public purpose, the Con solidation Officer and Settlement Officer, Consolidation rightly reserved the land for drying of clothes, but they fell in error when they allowed reservation of 3 biswas of land in plot No. 256 and 3 biswas and ten dhoors in Plot No. 216. The petitioners himself have admitted in paragraph 6 of writ peti tion in respect of reservation of six biswas and ten dhoors of land for said purpose. The petitioners himself have admitted in paragraph 6 of writ peti tion in respect of reservation of six biswas and ten dhoors of land for said purpose. According to relevant Government Order the total area of land which could be reserved in a village for said purpose could not be more than two biswas and the Con solidation Officer and Settlement Officer Consolidation fell in error in reserving land exceeding two biswas. Under such cir cumstances it was open for the Deputy Director of Consolidation to reduce the land but he could not deprive washermen altogether of the village in respect of land for washing and drying of clothes. He could have limited it to two biswas. As he has ignored the aforesaid Government Order dated 21st August, 1980, the revision re quires reconsideration by him. The require ment of washermen in accordance with the said Government Order, which provides for reservation of land for washing of clothes as well as one biswa of land for Dhobi Ghat, therefore, his judgment is unsustainable. 6. When it was pointed out to the learned counsel for petitioners that Con solidation Officer and Settlement Officer Consolidation could reserved land in all up to two biswas for washermen while the reservation made by Consolidation Officer and Settlement Officer Consolidation was much more. The learned counsel submitted that no appeal or revision was filed against the reservation of land in respect of plot No. 216 and, therefore, that cannot be interfered with. The argument is unsustainable. The order passed by Consolidation Officer and Settlement Officer Consolidation is patent ly illegal as they could not reserve the land beyond two biswas. They were also required to demarcate the land to be used for washing by Reh as well as for Dhobighat, which could not exceed two biswas. As the reservation made by them was in excess of the said per missible limit, the order of Settlement Of ficer Consolidation as well as Consolidation Officer also cannot be sustained and, there fore, while quashing the order of Deputy Director of Consolidation those orders are also liable to be quashed. 7. For aforesaid reasons the writ peti tion is allowed. 7. For aforesaid reasons the writ peti tion is allowed. The order dated 26-4-1989 passed by Deputy Director of Consolidation (Annexure 6 to writ petition), order dated 22-4-1988 passed by Settlement Officer Consolidation, Gorakhpur, Camp at Dumariya Ganj, Basti (Annexure 5 to writ petition) and order dated 12-3-1988 passed by Consolidation Officer (2) Basti (An nexure 4 to writ petition) are quashed and the Consolidation Officer is directed to consider the question of reservation of land for washermen of the village afresh in the light of aforesaid observation keeping in view G. O. No. C-55/g-437/76 dated 21st August, 1980 reserving land not exceeding one biswa having Reh for washing of clothes and another area not exceeding one biswa for Dhobighat in village Dhaurhara Mayparsadi Khas, Tappa Karhi, Pargnana Rasoolpur, Tehsil Dumariya Ganj, district Sidharth Nagar after demarcation. 8. As none has appeared on behalf of opposite parties there shall be no order as to costs. . Petition allowed. .