ORDER Shri R. K. Anand, F. C,—Petitioner, Mahantu has filed a revision petition against the order, dated 7-10-1982 of the Divisional Commissioner Kangra Division. By virtue of the impugned order, he dismissed the revision petition preferred to him as not maintainable. Since the land had been sanctioned in favour of the respondent, Bansi under the H, P. Grant of Nautor Land to Landless and other Eligible Persons Scheme, 1975, the Divisional Commissioner did not have any revisional jurisdiction and, therefore, he dismissed the revision petition as not maintainable, 2. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner end perused the court record. Perusal the court record reveals that the land comprising Khasra No. 1193/1, measuring 0-24-82 hectares situated in Mohal Sain, tehsil Sarkaghat, District Mandi, was sanctioned under the above noted Scheme in favour of Bansi. The Tehsildar, before sanctioning the land vide his order, dated 11-9-1V81, visited the spot and on the basis of the evidence produced before him came to the conclusion that the respondent, Bansi was eligible for the grant of land under the scheme. He also held that although Mahantu had encroached upon this land, he had been dispossessed of the same in 1978. He further observed that inspite of the opportunity of being heard given to the petitioner, Mahantu, he did not get a stay order against his ejectment from the land encroached upon by him. Aggrieved by this order, Mahantu „preferred a revision petition before the Additional Deputy Commissioner, who upheld the order of the Tehsildar and dismissed the revision petition. According to him, even though Mahantu was sanctioned nautor land comprising Khasra No. 1192 but since he was living with his father, he was not entitled to the grant of nautor land as his father had already been sanctioned nautor land. Since the Additional Deputy Commissioner, who is vested with the revisional jurisdiction under the above noted Scheme, has already exercised the revisional powers and has come to the conclusion that the respondent, Bansi was eligible for the grant of nautor land and the land comprising Khasra No. 1193/1 had been sanctioned in his favour, no interference is called for with his order. In any case, under the above noted Scheme, neither the Divisional Commissioner nor this Court has any revisional jurisdiction. The revision petition, is accordingly, dismissed. Order accordingly.