Judgment J.N.BHATT, J. 1. The challenge in this Writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India at the instance of the Petitioners is against the Order recorded, on 26th October, 1987, by the Joint Director of Consolidation, Purnea, in Revision Case No. 2351 of 1985, affirming the Order, passed by the Assistant Director, Consolidation, Saharsa, in Appeal No. 181 of 1983 dated 4th September, 1985, reversing the Order dated 24th June, 1983, passed by the Consolidation Officer, Kishanpur in Case No. 299 of 1982, which was already dismissed by the Assistant Consolidation Officer, Kishanpur, in the same case. 2. With a view to appreciate the merits of this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, let there be narration of short facts, which are important and relevant to the issue: (i) Disputed land is homestead land over which the Petitioners house and sahan are standing since 1934, as it was built just after the earthquake in 1934, as averred by the Petitioners; (ii) This house, obviously, will have to be demolished, if the impugned Orders are allowed to stand as per the case of the Petitioners; 3. It is submitted before this Court that the Order, passed by the Assistant Consolidation Officer in terms of the provisions of Sub-section (2) of Sec.10 of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention Fragmentation Act, 1988 (In short "the Act"), was decided on 12th June, 1980, in Case No. 982 of 1976, in terms of the compromise entered into by the parties whereas, Respondent No. 5 initiated a fresh innings, later, in 1982 by filing Consolidation Case No. 299 of 1982 under Sub-section (2) of Sec.10 of the Act, initially, contending that the compromise is not binding as he was not present and there were misrepresentation of facts while recording the Order of compromise by the Assistant Consolidation Officer in Case No. 982 of 1976 which came to be decided on 12th June, 1980, against which there was no appeal or revision about which there appears to be no controversy. 4. The Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956 (Bihar Act XXII of 1956), (For short "the Act"), which received the assent of the President on 6th February, 1956, is designed to provide for the consolidation of holdings and prevention of fragmentation. The object is quite wholesome and healthy. 4. The Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956 (Bihar Act XXII of 1956), (For short "the Act"), which received the assent of the President on 6th February, 1956, is designed to provide for the consolidation of holdings and prevention of fragmentation. The object is quite wholesome and healthy. This Act has been enacted with a view to encourage amalgamation of agricultural lands to save interest of the agriculturists. In Sec.10 of the Act provisions have been made for publication of registers of lands and statement of principles and objections thereon. Sec.10 of the Act is attracted for consideration of the merits of the matter on hand. Therefore, it is quoted, profitably, hereunder: 10. Publication of registers of lands and statement of principles and objections thereon- (1) The registers prepared under Sub-section (2) of Section 9 and the statement of principles prepared under Section 9A shall be published in the manner prescribed and shall remain published for not less than 30 days. (2) Any person may, within 45 days of the date of publication of the register under Sub-section (1) file before the Assistant Consolidation Officer, objection in respect thereof, disputing the correctness and nature of entries in the records or in the statement of principles. (3) The Assistant Consolidation Officer shall, after hearing the persons interested and after such enquiries as may be necessary, decide the objection, settle the disputes or correct the mistake, as far as may be, by way of compromise between the parties appearing before him and pass Orders on the basis of such compromise. (4) Ail cases which are not disposed of by the Assistant Consolidation Officer under Sub-section (3), all cases relating to valuation of plots and all cases relating to valuation of structures, tree, bamboo-clumps, well or other improvements for calculating., the amount thereof, and its- apportionment amongst co-owners, if there be more owners than one, shall be forwarded by the Assistant Consolidation Officer to the Consolidation Officer who shall dispose of the same in the manner prescribed. (5) Where objections have been filed against the statement of principles under Sub-section (2) of Sec.10, the Assistant Consolidation Officer, after affording opportunity of being heard to the parties concerned and after taking into consideration the view of the Village Advisory Committee, shall submit his report to the Consolidation Officer who shall dispose of the objections in the manner prescribed. (5) Where objections have been filed against the statement of principles under Sub-section (2) of Sec.10, the Assistant Consolidation Officer, after affording opportunity of being heard to the parties concerned and after taking into consideration the view of the Village Advisory Committee, shall submit his report to the Consolidation Officer who shall dispose of the objections in the manner prescribed. (6) Any person aggrieved by an Order of the Assistant Consolidation Officer or Consolidation Officer under Sub-section (3), (4) or (5) may within 30 days of such Order, file an appeal before the Assistant Director of Consolidation, whose decision, except as otherwise provided by or under this Act, shall be final. (7) The Consolidation Officer shall and the Assistant Director of Consolidation may, where necessary, before deciding an objection or an appeal, make local inspection of the unit, after giving due notice to the parties concerned and the Village Advisory Committee. 5. It could very well be seen that the register prepared under Sub-section (2) of Section 9 of the Act and the statement of principles prepared under Section 9A are required to be published in the manner prescribed and shall remain published for not less than 30 days. It could further be noticed that if a person wants to raise objection, he is entitled to raise such objection within 45 days of the date of publication, before the Assistant Consolidation Officer. Under Sub-section (3) of Sec.10 of the Act, the Assistant Consolidation Officer is obliged to considerthe objection after holding an inquiry and decide the objection to settle the dispute or correct the mistake, as far as may be, by way of compromise between the parties appearing before him and pass Orders on the basis of such compromise, whereas Sub-section (4) of Sec.10 of the Act provides that all cases, which are not disposed of by the Assistant Consolidation Officer under Sub-section (3), all cases relating to valuation of plots and all cases relating to valuation of structures, tree, bamboo-clumps, well or other improvements for calculating, the amount thereof, and its apportionment amongst co-owners, if there be more owners than one, shall be forwarded by the Assistant Consolidation Officer to the Consolidation Officer who shall dispose of the same in the manner prescribed. Sub-section (5)-of Sec.10 provides how to deal with the objections and decide. Sub-section (5)-of Sec.10 provides how to deal with the objections and decide. Sub-section (6) of Sec.10 of the Act empowers the aggrieved party to file an appeal against the Order of the Assistant Consolidation Officer to Assistant Director of Consolidation whose decision except, as otherwise provided by or under Act, shall be final. Sub-section (7) of Sec.10 of the Act prescribes procedures for holding of proceedings. Sub-section (6) of Sec.10 of the Act provides a right to appeal, whereas Sec.35 of the Act provides a revision and reference. 6. Ordinarily, when an Order of adjudication or settlement or compromise is passed by the competent authority and there is question of the compromise being suffering from vice of misrepresentation of facts, mistake or fraud, the authority is obliged to consider such contention irrespective of the fact whether it has attained finality or not because the very basis of the Order is questioned. 7. The original authority, Assistant Consolidation Officer, upon consideration of the factual profile and the pleas advanced, as aforesaid, on behalf of Respondent No. 5, rejected the case relying on the provisions of Sub-section (2) of Sec.10 of the Act which came to be questioned by the present Original Respondent No. 5 before the higher authority in appeal and revision. As noticed above, forum of appeal is provided for, in terms of Sub-section (6) of Sec.10 where the Order of the First Revenue Authority, Assistant Consolidation Officer, came to be questioned, successfully. The appeal was numbered as No. 181 of 1983 filed by Respondent No. 5, which came to be allowed which, on being carried to revision under Sec.35 of the Act, came to be affirmed and confirmed.That is why this Writ Petition by invocation of Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 8. The factual background is narrated in the Petition, as well as, in the impugned Order by the Revenue authorities. This Court need not, meticulously, reiterate all facts for reaching to the conclusion for the reason that the two authorities, namely, the Appellate Authority under Sub-section (6) of Sec.10 of the Act and revisional authority, under Sec.35 of the Act, have not applied mind to the vital issues raised in the case. It suffers from the vice of non-application of mind. It suffers from the vice of non-application of mind. It is, therefore, incumbent upon this Court to remit the matter to the Assistant Consolidation Officer for reconsideration of the matter afresh on all aspects and facts and materials placed before it and reach to a correct conclusipn, in accordance with law. 9. Accordingly, the matter is remitted back to the Assistant Consolidation Officer after reviving the original case and he is directed to consider all relevant material facts and the documents produced on the record afresh after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned in accordance with law. 10. With the above observations and directions, this Writ Petition shall stand allowed. Rule is made absolute. There will be no Order as costs.