C. Review No. 80 of 2008 16.03.2011 Present: Mr. G. D. Verma, Sr. Advocate with Mr. B. C. Verma, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Ram Murti Bisht, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. Vinod Thakur, Dy. A.G. for the respondents No. 1 and 2. The parties have been litigating since 1987 and all litigation must come to an end at some point in time. It is land dispute which stands settled in proceedings under the Himachal Pradesh Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1971. 2. According to Mr. G. D. Verma, learned Senior Counsel for the review petitioner there is error on the face of record inasmuch as order dated 26.10.1987 (Annexure-PD) has not been correctly appreciated while deciding the writ petition. It is further contended that statutory right of appeal was taken away. Perusal of this order undoubtedly shows that fair opportunity of hearing was not afforded to the petitioner and his request for adjournment was not acceded to and the appeal filed by him was dismissed. However the fact of the matter is that petitioner himself had exercised his statutory right of filing revision petition before the Director Consolidation. It is true that the Director Consolidation has not adverted to this aspect of the matter but while adjudicating the appeal on merits interest of the parties and equities has been kept in mind. Before him principles of natural justice have been adhered to. While deciding the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India this Court had considered all aspects of the matter and as such I find no error apparent on the face of the record. 3. Consequently the review petition is dismissed. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 16, 2011 (PK)