1. This is a revision petition filed against the orders of Additional Commissioner, Hyderabad Division, dated 3-11-82, rejecting the appeal of the petitioner being badly time-barred. The petitioner as well as respondent were present alongwith their Advocates.
2. Main contentions of the Advocate for petitioner are that the respondent was student at the time of Katchery and he managed to get the land from the Barrage Department on the basis of hare ship.
3. He has produced photostat copy of certificate of the respondent from Sind University. He, therefore, contended that the respondent was not eligible for grant of land being student. In support of his contention he has referred to Revenue Ruling pages 12 and 13. The Advocate further contended that the respondent alongwith his two brothers got 3 lots of the land. Besides that his father is also Zamindar by profession, therefore, he is not eligible for the grant of land. In support of his contention he has referred to para. 6 of the Land Grant Policy and Revenue Ruling, pages 90-91. He contended that the petitioner is resident of Deb and his father is cultivating adjoining S. Nos. He has produced Khasra Girdawari of the father of the petitioner.
4. The Advocate for respondent argued that under para. 6 of Land Grant Policy, a minor is not eligible for grant of land. The respondent does not fall in that category as he is major and living separate from his father. He has produced Identity Card and copy of the electoral list and Khasra Girdawari showing that the respondent is 25 years of age and is hari by profession. The Advocate contended that the respondent appeared privately in the examination and there is no bar on the private student to cultivate the land and continue his studies. He further stated that at the time of grant of land, the respondent had completed the education.
5. I have heard the Advocates for both the parties and perused the relevant record. From the perusal of certificate of Sind University, it appears that the respondent was student of B. A. In 1980-81. The land was granted to him after he took B. A. Examination. There is no bar in granting the land to the private Arts student as education is not his full time job. AS A regards granting 3 lots to the same family, it is proved that respondent is aged 25 years living separate from his father, therefore, eligible for grant of land as separate family member. The respondent was granted the land in open Katchery, where the petitioner did not contest, therefore, he should not have cause of action at this stage.
6. In view of the above facts, I do not see any reason to interfere with the order of Additional Commissioner, Hyderabad Division. The revision petition merits no consideration and is rejected.