(1.) This revision petition is under Section 91 of the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act (XXI of 1950), and seeks reversal of the order by the Collector in exercise of his appellate authority, whereby the opposite party has been held as protected tenants of the entire agricultural plots, bearing Survey Nos. 24, 25 and 28 situated in village Gomakunda, Nagarkurnool.
(2.) The advocate of the petitioner has not based his argument on absence of jurisdiction either in the original or the appellate authority, nor does he complain of the failure to exercise jurisdiction. Therefore, the short issue in the revision petition is whether the original or an appellate authority in following the procedure or passing the order has acted illegally or with material irregularity.
(3.) The facts giving rise to the revision petition are not complicated. Both the parties to the revision petition had applied to the original authority for being recorded as protected tenants under Section 34 of the Act, and that authority had declared both the parties to be such tenants of half share in the Survey Numbers. The revision petitioner did not appeal, but the opposite party did, and the Collector has varied the order holding that on the evidence, oral and documentary, as well as on the pahanis, the opposite party alone was the protected tenant.