1. ' This is a revision petition filed against the order of Additional Commissioner dated 18-5-1981 whereby he rejected the appeal of the petitioner being time barred as well as on merits. The petitioner present alongwith his Advocate. Respondent absent and is represented through his Advocate.
2. ' Brief facts of the case are given in the impugned order and need not be reproduced.
3. ' The main contentions of the Advocate for petitioner are that the petitioner is resident of deh and hari by profession. In support of his contentions he has produced Khasra Girdawari in respect of the petitioner for the year 1980-81 only. The Advocate further contended that respondent is resident of different deh Sebrat and he has produced bogus khasra girdawari. In support of his contention he has produced two certificates from supervisor Local Government Matli verifying from electoral of 1976 and 1979 respectively that the respondent is resident of Deh Sehrat.
4. ' The Advocate for respondent contended that land was granted to respondent on 8-5-1978 in open Katchery where the petitioner was not present and his appeal before Additional Commissioner was time barred by one year 11 months. He also contended that petitioner and his father are Zamindar by profession hence not eligible for the grant of the land. In support of his contention he has produced certified copies of village Form VII in respect of the holdings of petitioner and his father. The Advocate for respondent further alleged that petitioner is student and is not hari by profession. In support of his contention he has produced photostat copy of School Leaving Certificate. He also contended that respondent is resident of deh and hari of disputed land.
5. In support of his contention he has produced photostat copy of Identity Card pertaining to the year 1978 and Khasra Girdawari.
6. I have heard both the counsel for the petitioner as well as respondent. From the perusal of village Form VII produced in respect of holdings of the petitioner and his father, I am convinced that they are Zamindars. The petitioner is also student by profession as appears from the School leaving certificate. Therefore petitioner is not eligible for grant of land. The respondent was granted the land in katchery where petitioner did not contest therefore he should have no cause of action at this stage. The respondent is in physical cultivating possession of the land in dispute hence 1 do not see any reason to disturb his grant at this stage.
7. ' I am therefore of the opinion that order of Additional Commissioner, Hyderabad in appropriate and I do not see any reason to interfere with it. This revision merits no consideration and is rejected.