MANOJ KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision has been filed by Manoj Kumar against the order dated 12-3-97 passed by learned Commissioner Jhansi in a case arising out of proceeding under Section 198 (4) of the UPZA and LR Act.

(2.) BRIEFIY the facts of the case are that LMC executed a lease in favour of Manoj Kumar. A report was submitted by the tehsil to the effect that the Pradhan who is said to have conducted the meeting and granted lease in favour of Manoj Kumar was in jail on the relevant date and hence the Up-Pradhan in order to benefit his nephew has illegally granted the lease. The learned trial Court by his order dated 30-11-95 cancelled the lease. Revision filed by Manoj Kumar was also dismissed by the learned Commissioner. He has now come up in revision before the Board.

(3.) FOR the material on record it is evi­dent that the lease in question had not been granted in a proper way. The meeting was convened by the Up-Pradhan and in order to benefit his nephew he has managed to get a lease executed in favour of Manoj Kumar. The learn ed Commissioner also took note of the fact that on the death of his grand father the revisionist has got sufficient land and could not be treated to be a landless agricul­tural labourer. The learned lower Courts based their findings on a consideration of the evidence on record and have passed acorrect order. There is no illegality or any material irregularity in the exercise of jurisdiction committed by the Courts below to justify a revisional interference by this Court. Nothing new has been pointed out by the learned Counsel for the revisionist.