' These are three identical Review petitions against my order, dated 26-4-1971 whereby the Revision petitions of Versee and two others were accepted and the grants of land in Deh Dumbalo, Taluka Math, made to the petitioners was set aside
2. The facts of the cases are mentioned in details in my order, dated 26-4-1971 and it is needless to repeat them here.
3. I heard the counsel for the petitioners on 30-6-1971. He had produced a certified copy of the order, dated 7-11-1969 passed by the Chief Land Commissioner, West Pakistan in State v. Hussain Bux Suo motu Revision No, 137 of 1968-69 and contended that although the sales made to the petitioners were irregular and the land had to be disposed of by open auction as per standing orders yet the grants made to the petitioners were not liable to cancellation on account of that irregularity as the irregular, grants of this nature made prior to 15-10-1965 had already been regularised by the West Pakistan Land Commission, vide their Circular No, SDL-I-1277/65/4163-LC, dated 15-10-1965. He had further stated that the grants were made to the petitioners on 3-10-1961 and that the grants were, therefore, protected by the above order of the West Pakistan Land Commission.
4. I have considered the case and perused the letter dated 15-10-1965' and the order, dated 7-11- 1969 referred to by the counsel for the petitioners. According to the letter, dated 15-10-1 65, the West Pakistan Land Commission decided that all the sales of resumed proprietary land, cancelled from the names of sitting tenants and subsequently sold bona fide to other persons in contravention of the policy of the Commission, should be allowed to stand and consequently, the Chief Land Commissioner directed that only those sales, which were made bona fide upto and including the 24th June, 1965 should be allowed to stand and none else. Instructions clearly envisaged following two conditions for regularising the irregular sales.
(1) Sales made before and on 24th June, 1965. (ii) The sales made bona fide.
' In the present case, the sales were made to the petitioners in 1961 and as such the cases of the petitioners are covered by condition No, (i) As regards the condition No, (ii) the disputed land was originally granted to Versee, Rooro and Bhoomo. The petitioners had moved the Land Reforms authorities in the year 1961 that Versee, etc. Were their Sarriro Hans and that they were real Hans of the land it may be granted to them. The request of the petitioners for transfer of the land in their names was not granted by the Deputy Land Commissioner, Hyderabad, vide his two orders, dated 15-8-1961 and 19-8-1961 but the grants of land made to Versee, etc. Were also cancelled. The Deputy Land Commissioner, had further directed that the land so becoming available should be utilized according to the orders of the West Pakistan Land Commission. Subsequently, the Assistant Land Commissioner in contravention of the standing orders of the Land Commission and specific directions of the Deputy Land Commissioner granted the land to the petitioners. The request of the petitioner for grant of the land on the ground that they were real Haris of the land, had been rejected by the Deputy Land Commissioner, Hyderabad earlier and as such the Assistant Land Commissioner, had no business to grant the same land to them again. Consequently, the grants made to them cannot be termed as bona fide grants and I, therefore, hold that the grants of the petitioners are not covered by the condition No, (ii) and the same are not, therefore. Protected by the decision. Of the West Pakistan Land Commission contained in the letter. Dated 15th October 1965
5. In view of the above, there is no merit in the review petitions, which are, therefore, dismissed.
Review .