JUDGMENT : RAJIV JOSHI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel. 2. The petitioner by means of present writ petition has challenged the impugned order dated 14.6.2018 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, whereby the revision filed by the petitioner was dismissed affirming the order dated 19.1.2018 passed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation. 3. The record reflects that during the consolidation operation, the Assistant Consolidation Officer proposes two chaks to the petitioner, first over plot no. 294/3 and the second chak over plot no. 310. Accordingly, the respondent no.3, who is real brother of the petitioner was proposed first chak over plot no. 194/3 and second chak over plot no. 310. 4. Aggrieved by the proposed allotment made by the Assistant Consolidation Officer, the petitioner filed the objection under Section 20 of the U.P.C.H. Act, 1953 and demand of the petitioner was that a single chak over plot no. 294/3 be allotted to the petitioner and his brother may be allotted single chak over plot no. 310. The objection of the petitioner was rejected by the Consolidation Officer vide order dated 29.5.2017. Against that order, petitioner filed appeal bearing no. 11/405 before the Settlement Officer Consolidation and claim the said demand as raised before the Consolidation Officer. 5. The Consolidation Officer vide order dated 19.1.2018 partly allowed the appeal of the petitioner and allotted single chak over plot no. 294/3 to the petitioner as well as single chak to the respondent no.3 over plot no. 310. Whatever the demand as raised by the petitioner was fulfilled by the order of the Settlement Officer Consolidation but in spite of that the petitioner filed the revision demanding that single chak allotted to him by the Settlement Officer Consolidation is towards east and the chak allotted by the Settlement Officer Consolidation to his brother is behind the road. The Deputy Director of Consolidation vide order dated 14.6.2018 dismissed the revision filed by the petitioner. The order dated 14.6.2018 is impugned in the writ petition. 6. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that chak allotted by the Settlement Officer Consolidation is towards east and de-shaped and therefore, the same may be allotted single chak over the said plot in the shape of square and his brother may be allotted chak over plot no. 310 which is adjacent to pakki road.? 7. 6. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that chak allotted by the Settlement Officer Consolidation is towards east and de-shaped and therefore, the same may be allotted single chak over the said plot in the shape of square and his brother may be allotted chak over plot no. 310 which is adjacent to pakki road.? 7. The Deputy Director of Consolidation has specifically recorded a finding that the chak was allotted to the petitioner and his brother at the appellate stage as per their demand and no further changes are required and it will affect the other chak holders. The finding recorded by the Deputy Director of Consolidation on the basis of material on record, whatever the demand of the petitioner that has been fulfilled by the Settlement Officer Consolidation. 8. Present writ petition lack merits and is, accordingly, dismissed.