1. The sole ground on which the scheme of consolidation of holdings prepared for village Kalianwali in Tehsil Sirsa, District Hissar, is challenged in this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is that the concerned Consolidation Officer, who figures as respondent No. 3 did not obtain the advice of the village Committee constituted under Rule 4 of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Rules, 1949, although it was incumbent upon him to do so before finalization of the scheme, as provided in Section 14 of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Rules, 1948.
2. The petition must fail for the simple reason that the ground on which the scheme is now challenged was never put forward by the petitioner in the form of objections which they had the right to prefer either under the provisions of Section 19 of the Act to respondent No. 3 or under those of Section 21 (3) thereof to the Settlement Officer (respondent No. 2). Not having availed of the remedies provided to them under the Act itself, they cannot be held entitled to invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court.
3. The petition is accordingly dismissed with costs.
4. Petition dismissed.