NAYUDU, J.: This civil rule arises out of an order passed by the Adhi Conciliation Board, directing the ejectment of the petitioners from the land in dispute comprising of about 11/2 Bighas of land, which decision was confirmed on appeal by the Subordinate Judge, Dhubri, on 12-9-52. It is this decision of the learned Subordinate Judge that is ques­tioned before us in this civil rule. (2) The facts of the case may be briefly stated. The respondents 1 and 2 purchas­ed the property in dispute in the year 1955. One of these respondents is a blind man. and the other at the time of the purchase was a minor. The case of the respondents was that the petitioners were adhiars on their land and that as the land is required for their personal cultivation, they not having enough in their possession, and as the petitioners were in possession of nearly 20 Bighas of land, much more than 10 Bighas which is the minimum prescribed under the Assam Adhiars Protection and Regulation Act, 1948 (Assam Act XII of 1948), they accordingly asked for the relief of ejectment. The petitioners while con­ceding in their written statement that they were adhiars claimed that they were not in possession of more than 19 Bighas of land and that, therefore, they could not be evict­ed. They further pleaded that as on an earlier occasion in the year 1956-57, the present respondents 1 and 2 had applied for delivery of possession of this very land by ejecting the petitioners therefrom, which prayer was rejected by the Adhi Conciliation Board on 22-7-58 and the same confirmed by the Subordinate Judge on appeal, the present application for ejectment made to the Adhi Conciliation Board was barred by res judicata and could not have been entertained. It was further contended by Mr. Lahiri, the learned Counsel for the petitioners, to us that the present application made to the Adhi Conciliation Board amounted to an application for review of the pre­vious order, and therefore, not maintainable, there being no specific provision, authorising the Adhi Conciliation Board to review their own previous decision. (3) To take the first point first, we are clearly of opinion that there is no question of any principle of res judicata applying to the facts of this case. (3) To take the first point first, we are clearly of opinion that there is no question of any principle of res judicata applying to the facts of this case. It is clear from the provisions of the Act that an adhiar holds the land for a year and he may continue in possession in sub­sequent years in the absence of any changed conditions. It is clear from a perusal of the definition of the expres­sion "Adhiar" in the Act, to which we shall make refe­rence presently, and Sec. 3 (1) thereof, the status of the adhiar could be examined during each year as it de­pends on many circumstances including the material fact of the extent of land in his possession. In such a case, we are clearly of opinion that there can be no question of the application of the principle of res judicata even on analogy. (4) It has been, found by the Adhi Conciliation Board as well as by the learned Subordinate Judge that the petitioners were in possession of nearly 18 Bighas of cul­tivable land, and that, therefore, as this extent is far in excess of the minimum of 10 Bighas of land, the res­pondents 1 and 2 were entitled to ask for the eviction of the petitioners from the land in dispute. They further held that as one of the respondents is blind and the other was a minor at the time of the acquisition of the land, they must be regarded as entitled to have personal cultivation through servants, and thus are entitled to ask for possession. Both the courts below found that the case put forward by the petitioners that they were in possession of the land for more than 20 years and that, therefore, they had acquired a right of occupancy, was not proved. The finding is that the petitioners were in possession only for five or six years. (5) Before proceeding further, it would be useful to refer to the relevant provisions of the Assam Adhiars Pro­tection and Regulation Act, 1948. "2. In this Act, unless there is anything repugnant In the subject or context,- (1) "Adhiar" means a person who under the system generally known, as Adhi (whether Guchiadhi or Guliadhi), barga, chukti, bhag or chukani cultivates the land of another person on condition of delivering a share of quan­tity of the produce of such land to that person; 3. "2. In this Act, unless there is anything repugnant In the subject or context,- (1) "Adhiar" means a person who under the system generally known, as Adhi (whether Guchiadhi or Guliadhi), barga, chukti, bhag or chukani cultivates the land of another person on condition of delivering a share of quan­tity of the produce of such land to that person; 3. (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary con­tained in. any law for the time being in force or any con­tract or agreement, express or implied, any person who during the preceding agricultural year cultivates any land as adhiar shall have a right to remain in .occupation and cultivate the land for subsequent years until he either voluntarily relinquishes the land or is ordered by a Revenue Officer under Sec. 5 to case to cultivate and vacate the land or is evicted therefrom in execution of a valid order of the Revenue Officer." This Act was amended in 1952, 1955 and 1957. With reference to the two later amendments, it would be useful to extract Sec. 5 of the Act, as amended. "5. (1) Subject to the provisions of sub-sec. (2) below, an Adhi Conciliation Board may, on application of a landlord and after due notice and enquiry as prescribed, order an Adhiar, on one or more of the grounds mentioned below, to cease to cultivate an Adhi land and to be evict­ed thereform in the manner prescribed :- (i) that the land is bona fide required by the land­lord for his personal cultivation; Provided that,- (a) if the aggregate area of lands in actual occupation of an adhiar does not exceed 10 bighas, then he shall not be evicted therefrom, until he has been provided with land of equivalent value in the locality; (b) if the aggregate area of lands in actual occupa­tion of an adhiar exceeds 10 bighas, then the adhiar shall not be evicted from a minimum area of 10 bighas as selected by him (adhiar), until he has been provided with land of equivalent value in the locality, but the landlord shall be entitled to resume for his personal cultivation any area in excess of these 10 Bighas. In no case, how­ever, the aggregate area of lands so resumed from all his adhiars taken together, along with any other land already held under personal cultivation by the landlord or any member of his family on the date . In no case, how­ever, the aggregate area of lands so resumed from all his adhiars taken together, along with any other land already held under personal cultivation by the landlord or any member of his family on the date . of resumption, shall exceed an overall limit of 100 bighas; (c) if the landlord is a minor, or a widow, or a person subjected to any physical or mental disability or a member of the Military, Naval or Air Forces of the Union, then It shall not be obligatory on him to leave a minimum area with the adhiar as provided for in (a) or (b) above; (d) if the landlord does not cultivate the land within one year or sub-lets it to others within two years from the date he gets possession of the land by virtue of this clause, the evicted adhiar shall be restored to possession in the manner prescribed. (2) No adhiar who has acquired any right of occupancy under any other law shall be evicted except under the provisions of that law, and no adhiar who has acquired any other right under any other law shall be deprived at It." Assam Act XI of 1957 amended the definition "personal cultivation" and it runs as follows :- "2 (7). (2) No adhiar who has acquired any right of occupancy under any other law shall be evicted except under the provisions of that law, and no adhiar who has acquired any other right under any other law shall be deprived at It." Assam Act XI of 1957 amended the definition "personal cultivation" and it runs as follows :- "2 (7). "Personal cultivation" means cultivation by the person himself or by any member of his family or by his servants or hired labourers on fixed remuneration pay­able in cash or kind but not in crop share, under per­sonal supervision of the person himself or any member of his family, provided it is accompanied by the bearing of risks of cultivation by the owner and by residence in the village in which the land is situate or in a nearby village within a distance of five miles during the greater part of the agricultural season : Provided that in the case of a person who is a widow, or a minor, or is subject to any physical or mental dis­ability or is a member of the Military, Naval or Air Forces-of the Union, or is a student below the age of twenty-five years of any educational institution recognised by the State Government, the land shall be deemed to be under personal cultivation even in the absence of such personal supervision!1' (6) It is also clear from Sec. 11 (2) of the Act, a» amended in 1955 (Assam Act XIII of 1955), that the order of the Adhi Conciliation Board, as considered and dealt with by the appellate Court under Sec. 11 (1), is final. This section is as follows -.- "11. (1) Any person, aggrieved by an order of the Adhi Conciliation Board or the Revenue Officer under this Act may, within the prescribed time and in the prescribes-manner, appeal to the Sub-Judge having jurisdiction over the area concerned and the latter may uphold, modify or set aside the order, or pass such order as he may deem fit. (1) Any person, aggrieved by an order of the Adhi Conciliation Board or the Revenue Officer under this Act may, within the prescribed time and in the prescribes-manner, appeal to the Sub-Judge having jurisdiction over the area concerned and the latter may uphold, modify or set aside the order, or pass such order as he may deem fit. (2) The order of the Adhi Conciliation Board or the Revenue Officer when no appeal is preferred, and the orders, of the Sub-Judge when an appeal is preferred, shall b& final." (7) On the materials placed before us, we are satis­fied that the respondents 1 and 2 are entitled to obtain possession of the land in the circumstances, and en the facts, as found by the courts below, namely, that the petitioners were adhiars and that they 'had been in pos­session for nearly five or six years and that they had in their occupation cultivable land to the extent of nearly 18 Bighas. (8) Mr. Pathak, appearing for the State, also con­tended that this writ petition was filed on 15-3-63 where­as the order of the Subordinate Judge on appeal was passed on 12-9-62. We also consider that the application has been filed at a very late stage. That apart, we are not satisfied on the materials of the case that there is any substance in this petition, which calls for the exer­cise of our extraordinary jurisdiction under Art. 226 of the Constitution. (9) The petition, therefore, fails and is dismissed; with costs which wp assess at Rs. BOA. Petition dismissed.