1. ' In this review application two points have been urged. First, it is submitted that prior to the cancellation of the lease no notice was served upon the petitioner. It is to be noticed that this point was also taken by the petitioner before the Additional Commissioner and the Board of Revenue.
2. Both these authorities examined the record and held that a notice was in fact issued and served upon the petitioner.
3. This being a finding of fact cannot be reopened in writ jurisdiction. Second, it is contended that the failure of the petitioner to pay instalments of the lease money was a breach capable of rectification and as such the Collector could not cancel the lease on that account. Now, the question whether the failure to pay the instalments of lease money was capable of rectification or not was one for the revenue authorities to decide. Apparently they have taken the view that it, was not capable of rectification. I can find no basis for holding that the view taken by them is indefensible.
2. For the reasons stated above I dismiss this review application in limine.
4. Review declined. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.