ORDER Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral) - This writ petition has been filed with a prayer to quash order dated November 6, 1986, vide which passage measuring 40 Karams x 2 Karams through Khasra No. 320 (owned by the petitioner) was sanctioned in favour of respondents No. 2 and 3. Further challenge has been laid to the order dated May 20, 1987, dismissing application of the petitioner to recall the earlier order. 2. It is apparent from the records that respondents No. 2 and 3 were the owners of land bearing Khasras No. 316, 317, 318 and 319. By stating that this piece of land was not connected with the main passage, an application was filed by them under Section 42 of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 (in short the Act) with a prayer that the passage be provided to them through Khasra No. 320 by rectifying the mistake, which had occurred at the time of implementation of repartition in the village. Notice of that application was issued. However, the present petitioner failed to appear on the date fixed, which led to the passing of an order on November 6, 1986, sanctioning passage through his land bearing Khasra No. 320. The present petitioner then filed an application under Section 42 of the Act to recall order dated November 6, 1986, on the ground that he failed to appear before the respondent No. 1, on the date fixed, as he was not served in that case. His contention was negatived by respondent No. 1 on the ground that the petitioner had himself admitted that he was served but the grounds of revision were not supplied to him and that he had noted down the date of appearance as 6.11.1986, however, he forgot the date and mistook it as November 9, 1986. 3. After hearing counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the view that no injustice has been done to the petitioner in this case. It is apparent from the site plan that a passage, which was left during consolidation proceedings, comes up to the land owned by the petitioners, i.e., Khasra No. 320. Respondents No. 2 and 3 are owners of land bearing Khasras No. 316 to 319, which is not linked with the main passage. It is apparent from the site plan that a passage, which was left during consolidation proceedings, comes up to the land owned by the petitioners, i.e., Khasra No. 320. Respondents No. 2 and 3 are owners of land bearing Khasras No. 316 to 319, which is not linked with the main passage. Taking note of the same, a very judicious order was passed by giving them passage measuring 40 Karams x 2 Karams through Khasra No. 320 from its southern side. An equivalent area was given to the petitioner from Khasra No. 319, owned by respondents No. 2 and 3. It is true that respondents No. 2 and 3 had purchased land after conclusion of the consolidation proceedings. Technically they may not be entitled to pray for providing them a passage under Section 42 of the Act. However, it is a case, in which no injustice has been done to the petitioner and as such it is not necessary for this Court to interfere at his instance while exercising extra-ordinary writ jurisdiction under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India. Dismissed. —————————