JUDGMENT 1. - Against the order of conversion passed by the S.D.O., the appeal was filed before the Revenue Appellate Authority (for short 'RAA') which was decided ex-parte on 16.5.1990. It may be stated that on that day i.e. 16.5.1990, the RAA decided such 46 appeals ex-parte. On an application filed by the respondents in those appeals under section 65(2) of the Land Revenue Act, the RAA was convinced that there was a genuine reason for the respondents not to appear at the time of hearing of the appeal as there was change in the date. In that view of the matter, all the ex-parte orders passed by the RAA were set aside and all the appeals were restored to the file. However, out of those 46 appeals, only in one case i.e. the present case, the private respondent No. 6-Kheema Ram filed a second appeal before the Board of Revenue which was accepted on 17.12.1999 and the order passed by the RAA on 6.7.1992 was set aside. This has been challenged by the petitioner in this petition. 2. When the RAA was convinced that it had wrongly decided the appeals ex-parte against the respondents and, therefore, set aside those ex-parte orders, then in my considered opinion, it was not open for the Board of Revenue to interfere with such orders in appeal. While setting aside the ex-parte orders and restoring those appeals for their decision on merits, the RAA committed no error in law. In fact, it had done substantial justice to the parties against whom the appeals were decided ex-parte. Once the genuine case is shown for not remaining present at the time of hearing of the appeal, then in my considered opinion, the RAA was fully justified in setting aside its own ex-parte order. 3. Before parting, it must be stated that such an order was passed by the RAA in all 46 appeals but as stated at the bar, only in one case i.e. the present case, the said order was challenged before the Board of Revenue and without considering those important aspects of the matter, the Board of Revenue has set aside the subsequent order passed by the RAA on 6.7.1992. 4. In view of the above discussion, this petition is allowed, the impugned judgment and order dated 17.12.1999 (Annex. 4. In view of the above discussion, this petition is allowed, the impugned judgment and order dated 17.12.1999 (Annex. 3) passed by the Board of Revenue is hereby quashed and set aside, the order dated 6.7.1992 (Annex. 2) passed by the RAA is hereby restored and the RAA is directed to hear the appeal and decide the same in accordance with law. 5. It is made clear that while allowing this petition, this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and it will be open for the RAA to decide the same afresh strictly in accordance with law.Writ allowed. *******