' This is a revision petition against the order of the Learned Director, G. M. B., Project, dated 5-8-1970, rejecting appeal of the petitioner Mst. Changal in respect of S. Nos. 594 to 596 of Deh East Laiqpur, Taluka Mirpur Bathoro.
2. Facts briefly are that on 4-3-1970 above S. Nos. Were granted to the respondent in open Kutchery on Harap condition. Being dissatisfied with that grant, she preferred an appeal with the Project Director on the ground that these S. Nos. Were in Mohag of her Kabuli Nos. 241 to 243 and that the respondent resides somewhere else and is not "Abadgar" and, therefore, it may be granted to her.
The Project Director rejected the appeal; hence this revision.
3. Mr. Ali Ahmad, on behalf of the petitioner reiterates the same points that were raised in lower Court that she has two Annas share in S. Nos. 241 to 243 and she can claim Mohag right on the disputed land. He also contends that the respondent was granted this land in 1959 which, was cancelled and again granted to him somewhere in 1968. This is the third time that this land has been granted to him which clearly shows that he is not fit person to be granted this land.
4. The respondent, on the other hand, contends that this land was originally granted to one Pir Bux Jakhro in 1958. After cancellation it was granted to respondent in 1959-60. He continued to cultivate it but it was cancelled in 1965 for non-payment of instalments. The case for shifting of instalments was pending with the Barrage authorities when in 1970 the land was again put in the schedule for fresh disposal. Finding no other way he again applied for this land which was granted to him. From the year 1962-63 to 1971-72, he has been cultivating this land by rotation. The petitioner cannot claim Mohag right from her S. Nos. As there are intervening S. Nos. 581 and 582 which have been granted to Mst. Mithan who is co-sharer in Kabuli S. Nos. 241 to 243.
5. After hearing the arguments and going through the record, I find that the petitioner's daughter has been granted S. Nos. 580 to 582 in Mohag of the S. Nos. 241 to 243 on Mohag right. This grant was made in 1958-59. According to the Standing Order then in force, the Mohag right was to be considered only if the land was in the ownership of a person A 10 years before June, 1957. Obviously, therefore, she cannot claim Mohag right from these S. Nos. Which have been granted to her daughter on Mohag right. The Supervising Tapedar who is present with record, informs that S. Nos.
Under dispute have been cultivated by rotation by the respondent during the years 1962-63, 1963- 64, 1964-65, 1968-69, i970-71 and 1971-72. It will thus be hard and unjust if this land is snatched away from him after so many years particularly when the petitioner has no Mohag right. I feel, in fact, the case of the respondent for regnant or shifting of instalments should have been considered in normal course. Anyway, since this is a fresh grant which has been made to him on various considerations, I find no reason to interfere with the orders of the lower Court and revision is accordingly rejected.
Revision rejected.