ORDER This writ petition is filed being aggrieved by the order passed by the Deputy Director of Land Records, Bellary, wherein the revision has been allowed and the order effecting phodi in respect of Sy. No. 279/B as 279/B1, 279/B2 and 279/B3 is cancelled and the main contention of the petitioner in this writ petition is that, no notice was issued to the petitioner in respect of the proceedings before the Deputy Director of Land Records and there was delay of about 30 years in filing the revision petition before the Deputy Director of Land Records as phodi was done in respect of Sy. No. 279/B (B1, B2 and B3) by order passed in 1970 and application has been filed for condonation of delay as per Annexure-D to the writ petition and Deputy Director of Land Records without considering the application for condoning the delay has disposed of the revision on merits and therefore the order is liable to be set aside. 2. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Counsel appearing for respondents 4 to 6 and the learned High Court Government Pleader, appearing for respondents 1 to 3. 3. It is clear from the perusal of the material on record that Revision Petition No. 26 of 2002-03 was filed before the Deputy Director of Land Records, Bellary with an application for condonation of delay on 4-122002 and the Deputy Director has disposed of the revision on merits without considering the application for condonation of delay. 3. It is clear from the perusal of the material on record that Revision Petition No. 26 of 2002-03 was filed before the Deputy Director of Land Records, Bellary with an application for condonation of delay on 4-122002 and the Deputy Director has disposed of the revision on merits without considering the application for condonation of delay. It is now well-settled that when there is delay in filing the revision petition and application was filed for condoning the delay, the application for condonation of delay has to be decided in the first instance and only if the delay is condoned, the revision can be disposed of on merits and revision cannot be disposed of without giving finding in the application for condonation of delay as Revisional Authority will get jurisdiction to decide the revision on merits only after the delay is condoned and having regard to the fact that the Deputy Director has disposed of the revision without considering the application for condonation· of delay and without affording opportunity to the petitioner to substantiate the contention, I hold that the order passed by the Deputy Director of Land Records, Bellary, impugned in the writ petition dated 30-4-2003 is liable to be set aside and remitted to the Deputy Director of Land Records for fresh disposal, in accordance with law. Accordingly, I pass the following order. 4. The writ petition is allowed. Order passed by the Deputy Director of Land Records, Bellary, dated 30-4-2003 is set aside and the revision is remitted to the Deputy Director of Land Records, Bellary with a direction to consider the application for condonation of delay in filing the revision and thereafter dispose of the revision in accordance with law in the light of the observations made in the body of this order if sufficient ground is made out for condoning the delay. All the contentions of the parties are kept open to the urged before the Deputy Director of Land Records, Bellary. Parties are directed to appear before the Deputy Director of Land Records on 21-11-2006 without necessity of issuing fresh notice.