BHIM RAJ Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MR . Bhati is directed to accept the notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 to 4, which he has accepted and appeared for them.

(2.) THE petitioners have challenged in this petition the impugned order dated 23.8.1988 (Annex.5) passed by the Board of Revenue by which the revision petition filed by the State through Tehsildar against the order dated 12.4.1979 (Annex.4) passed by the revenue appellate authority was allowed.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel Shri Chopra for the petitioners vehemently submitted that the Board of Revenue exceeded in its revisional jurisdiction. He submitted that the revisional powers should not be exercised lightly by the Board of Revenue. He submitted that the Board of Revenue has simply stated in its order that it did not agree with the findings recorded by Revenue Appellate Authority about the measurement of the land for which it has not assigned any reasons. He submitted that findings of fact recorded by the appellate authority cannot be interfered lightly by the Board of Revenue in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction. However, he fairly conceded that the Board of Revenue was right in observing that Revenue Appellate Authority had no jurisdiction to order the authority to regularise the excess land. Shri Bhati Additional Government Advocate has tried to support the order (Annexure -5) passed by