' This is a revision petition filed against the order of Additional Commissioner, Hyderabad dated 6- 8-1979, whereby he rejected the appeals of the petitioners. Petitioner Jehan Begum is absent but she is represented through her Advocate. The intervenor Nawab is present alongwith his Advocate.
' Brief facts of the case are given in the impugned order of Additional Commissioner, Hyderabad and need not be reproduced.
' The main contentions of the petitioner's Advocate are that the petitioner is owner of S. No,
168. The disputed S. No, 189 falls in Muhag of Kabuli S. No, of the petitioner hence same should be granted to petitioner. The Advocate further contended that disputed land is bifurcated by running watercourse and it does not fall within 20 chains of village Khair Muhammad. He also contended that village Khair Muhammad Mari is abandoned one.
' The Advocate for intervenor contended that disputed land falls within 20 chains of village Khair Muhammad Mari. The intervenor and his family are residing there and they have house there. He further contended that disputed S. No, is not surrounded from all sides by the petitioner's land, therefore, the petitioner cannot claim the disputed land on the basis of Mohag.
' I have heard both the parties and perused the relevant record and the report of Assistant Commissioner, Hyderabad dated 19-5-1982. From the perusal of report of Assistant Commissioner, it appears that the disputed. S. No, 189 falls within 20 chains of village Khair Muhammad Mari, which though is abandoned but no disassigned by Deputy Commissioner, Hyderabad. The Assistant Commissioner has also reported that at present there is no watercourse separating disputed land and village Khair Muhammad Mari. The watercourse is running on the East of S. No,
189. The petitioner has not proved the contention through any documentary proof. I am, therefore, satisfied from the spot inspection report of Assistant Commissioner, Hyderabad Sub-Division that the land in dispute falls within 20-chains of village Khair Muhammad Mari, which has not been dis-assigned and there are houses of intervenor and other persons. There is no provision for the grant of land within 20 chains under the Land Grant Policy.
' The order of Additional Commissioner is appropriate. I see no reason to interfere with his order.
The land in dispute should be reserved for this purpose. Revision petition is accordingly rejected.