' This is a revision petition against the order, dated nil passed by Addl. Commissioner, Sukkur Division, whereby he rejected the appeal of the petitioners in respect of S. Nos. 549 and 550 of Deh Gaji Gadani, Taluka Mirpur Mathelo granted to respondent on Harap condition from Rabi 1973-74.
2. The facts of the case are already given in the impugned order and need not be reproduced.
3. The counsel for the petitioner mainly contends that respondent Lal who has been granted disputed land admeasuring 9-33 Acres on Harap conditions, already holds 10 Acres of Kabuli land on his Khata and according to the policy no person can be granted land more than 16 acres inclusive of his Kabuli land. If the disputed land is allowed to remain with the respondent, his holding would exceed the limit prescribed by the policy. He further contends that petitioner Khan Muhammad has also Mohag right over S. Rs, 550 from his Kabuli S. Rs, 551 and on 549 from his Kabuli S. Rs, 112 and the Addl. Commissioner has not even discussed the Mohag right of the petitioner. In his impugned order although the same was vehemently argued before him. The Addl.
Commissioner has wrongly held that the names of the petitioner shown in the Khasra Girdwari register are suspicious. It is an official record and is beyond the reach of the petitioners.
4. The counsel for the respondent on the other hand mainly contends that the respondent Lal has sold away an area of 2-37 acres out of S. Nos. 185, 186 and 187 of Deh Tahar Gadani and as such his holding would automatically become less than 16 Acres. The order of the ddl. Commissioner is self- explanatory and it requires no further comments.
5. After hearing the arguments and perusing the impugned order as well as the relevant documents produced by the counsels of the parties, I come to the conclusion that the respondent Lal already holds an area of 10 Acres on his Khata and he has disposed of 2-37 acres out of S. Nos.
185, 186 and 187 of Deh Tahar Gadani on 6-2-1974 being his share. Para. 5 of the new Land Grant Policy provides -that a Hari or small Khatedar in Barrage area shall be eligible for the grant-of land upto:.1 the limit of 16 acres inclusive of his Kabuli holding, if any, in the present! Case the respondent has been granted an area of 9 acres 33 Ghuntas on Harap conditions and if his Kabuli holding of 10 Acres is added to, his holding would come to 19-33 acres i.e. 3.33 Acres in excess. Thus, there is clear contravention of mandatory provision of land grant policy.
The Addl. Commissioner was, therefore, not justified in rejecting the appeal of the petitioner.
6. In view of the above legal position, I set aside the impugned order and remand the case to the Addl. Commissioner, Sukkur Division for fresh decision on merits after hearing the parties and examining the relevant record.