( 1 ) THIS order will dispose of CM (M) 256/85 and CM (M) Nos. 267 to 2 73 of 1985.

( 2 ). This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution it directed against an order of the Financial Commissioner, Delhi, dated 23rd July, 1985 whereby the learned Financial Cominissioner Delhi vacated an order dated 23rd March, 1985 passed by Revenue Assistant directing status quo to be maintained during pendency of a petition filed by the petitioners under Section 11 (l) (a) of the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954.

( 3 ) AN order for eviction was passed against the petitioners under Section 86 (a) of the aforesaid Act on 12th December, 1980. The petitioners are alleged by the respondents to have been dis-possessed on 8th May, 1984 Petitioners being aggrieved by order dated 12th December, 1980 filed a revision petition before the Financial Commissioner which was dismissed on 23rd July, 1984.

( 4 ) ON 28th August, 1984, petitioners filed an application under Section 11 (a) (a) of the aforesaid Act for being declared Bhumidhar for the first time. Delhi Land Reforms Act had come into force practically about 30 years back, yet no application was filed for being declared Bhumidhar. In the revenue records the land had been mutated as having vested in the Gaon Sabha being Banjar.

( 5 ) ALONG with the application for declaration of Bhumidhari rights petitioners applied under Section 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure for restraining the revenue authorities from dis-possessing the petitioners and ex-parte ad-interim order was passed for directing the maintenance of status quo. This order was passed on 12th September, 1984 ex-parte and the Gaou Sabha applied on 5th October, 1984 for setting aside this order. Both the applications filed by petitioners under Order 39 Rules 1and2 of the Code and one filed by Gaon Sabha for vacation of that order were decided by one order of Revenue Assistant. The Revenue Assistant on 23rd March, 1985 confirmed the ex-parte order. Against this order of the Revenue Assistant, the Gaon Sabha, Soongarpur filed an appeal before the Financial Commissioner on 26th March, 1985. By the impugned order Financial Commissioner, Delhi accepted the appeal and dismissed the application of the petitioners for interim relief during pendency of proceedings under Section 11 (a) (a) of the aforesaid Act.

( 6 ) NORMALLY, these are interlocutory matters totally within the jurisdiction of the Administrative Tribunals and this Court does not really 144 interfere with such orders unless some grave injustice occurred by ignoring some material documents or on other substantial grounds. Even under Section 115 of the Code this Court does not interfere with these types of matters except in the case of grave illegality or infirmity in exercise of the Jurisdiction. It will be noticed that even in the Khatauni of the year 1951-52, the land is described as Banjar. Right till 19so when eviction order was passed against the petitioners, it was not recorded in their names. Portion is that is per revenue records right from 195152 till 1980 the land is shown as Banjar and in view of the provisions of the Delhi Land Reforms Act, this land got vested in the Gaon Sabha. It is apparent that they occupied the land somewhere in 1980, that is why the proceedings were filed with the result that order for eviction was passed on 12th December, 1980 and even the revision against that order was dismissed on 16th July, 1984. It is, thereafter that the present proceedings were initiated by a petition under Section 11 (1) (a) of the aforesaid Act. No revenue records have been placed before the Revenue Assistant or before the Financial Commissioner which may prima-facie support the case of the petitioners for grant of Bhumidhari rights to the petitioners. It was in these circumstances, learned Financial Commissioner has vacated the order.

( 7 ) IT will be noticed that the Delhi Land Reforms Act contemplates Bhumidhari rights being granted to actua