Matter is taken in revised cause list.

2. None appeared on behalf of the contesting respondents.

3. Heard Sri Mohd. Sadab Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner. learned State Counsel and perused the record.

4. The controversy in the present case relates to land recorded in Gata no. 165/0.20 Dec., 166/0.360 Dec., 167/0.275 Dec. and 100/20,200 Dec. situate at village Bahraich Khas, pargana, Tehsila and District Bahraich.

5. As per version of the petitioner, he has purchased the land from the original tenure holder. Accordingly, his name was mutated in the revenue record as per order dated 9.6.1961 and he was in possession.

6. It is further stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that on the basis of report of Lekhpal and without issuing any notice to the petitioner, his name has been removed from the revenue record ex parte as such he moved an application for recall of the ex parte order, which was rejected. Aggrieved by the said fact, petitioner filed an appeal before the appellate authority, dismissed by order dated 24.8.2000. Aggrieved by the said fact, petitioner filed revision before opposite party no.1/ Additional Commissioner ( Administration ) Devi Patan