' This is an appeal against the order dated 2-2-1972 of the learned Revenue Officer, Kotri Barrage, Hyderabad, whereby, B. No, 154/2, 3 and B. No, 153/2. 3, were granted to the respondents Muhammad Malik and Muhammad Aslam, respectively on Harap condintions.
2. The counsel for the appellant contended that the disputed land alongwith other land was granted to the petitioner by the Barrage Authorities for Rabi 1958-59 on Harap tenure and after issue of necessary Ijazatnama, he was put in possession of the land. Due to shortage of water supply and also the land being at the tail of the Khairsar Shakh the appellant could not cultivate it.
In support of his contentions he produced certificate issued by the X. E. N. Main line Division, which confirmed the position. He further contended that the respondent Muhammad Aslam was minor of about 8 years when the land was granted to him on Harap tenure. The respondent was, therefore, not entitled to the grant of the land on Harap tenure he being minor. In support of his contention, the counsel produced a certificate issued by the Headmaster, Government Primary School, Golarchi. It appears that some fictitious person was brought before the learned Revenue Officer at the time of Kachery. Similarly, respondent Muhammad Malik was also not entitled to the grant of land on Harap tenure as he had settled in Sind in that year only, hence he could not fulfil the conditions of grant of land on Harap tenure. He further added that the grant of the appellant made in the year 1958 was not liable to cancellation as the appellant could not cultivate the land due to shortage of water. Moreover, it was also incumbent on the Barrage Authorities to have informed the appellant about the cancellation of the grant and disposal of land when he happens to be resident of the Deh.
3. The attorney of the respondent Malik contended that it was not a fact that due to shortage of water the appellant had failed to cultivate the land but as a matter of fact, he had abandoned the idea of cultivating the land. The respondent Muhammad Aslam however, admitted that he was a minor boy when the land was granted to him in the year 1970. The respondents were unable to produce any documentary evidence to prove that they had come to Sind area prior to the disposal of land to them.
4. Heard the arguments and perused the record. The names of the respondents are not shown in the Khasra Girdwari to indicate their geninueness of being Haris. The respondent Muhammad Aslam who was present in the Court was hardly of 12 pears of age and obviously, therefore, he was not entitled to the grant of land on Harap tenure he being minor. Similarly respondent Muhammad Malik is not Hari by profession as his name does not find place in the Khasra Girdwari. Moreover, the appellant was not informed of the cancellation of the grant.
5. In view of the facts mentioned above, I uphold the appeal and direct that arrears with penal interest be recovered from the appellant and B land re-granted to him. The order of the learned Revenue Officer, Kotri Barrage granting the land to the respondents is set aside. n ......1