JUDGMENT P. Singh, Member - This review petition has been filed for setting aside the orders of this court dated May 24, 1985. 2. It appears that a second appeal was filed against the judgment and decree dated October 28, 1983 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Jhansi, dismissing appeal No. 44/30 of 1982-83. The facts of the case were that the plaintiff-appellant filed a suit under Section 229-B of U.P. Act I of 1951 on the ground that he had been granted a lease in respect of plot No. 48/areas 7.17.0 and No. 1429/1, area 1.7.0 situate in village Piprauli Tehsil Mau, district Banda, and that the Land Management Committee had passed a resolution on May 4, 1981 for converting the lease into Bhumidhari rights. The suit was dismissed by the trial court. An appeal was dismissed by the trial court. An appeal was preferred before the learned Additional Commissioner, who also dismissed the appeal. A second appeal was filed before this court, and the second appeal was decided by the order dated May 24, 1985. 3. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties, and perused the record. 4. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that vide resolution dated May 4, 1981 the land leased out as Asami to the appellant was converted into Bhumidhari land. I find that this resolution was not considered while deciding the matter. Admission to land is made under Section 195 of U.P. Act I of 1951 by the Land Management Committee in respect of land which is vacant and has vested in Gaon Sabha under Section 117, or it has come into the possession of Land Management Committee under Section 194 or under any other provision of the Act, and Sirdari rights could be conferred only if the land does not fall in any of the classes mentioned under Section 132. There is nothing on record to establish that the land fell within any of the classes mentioned in Section 132. As such it is not known how the appellant was granted an Asami lease in respect of this land. Since this mistake has been corrected by the Land Management Committee vide resolution of May 4, 1981 it would be presumed that the lease granted in favour of the appellant was for Sirdari rights. As such it is not known how the appellant was granted an Asami lease in respect of this land. Since this mistake has been corrected by the Land Management Committee vide resolution of May 4, 1981 it would be presumed that the lease granted in favour of the appellant was for Sirdari rights. In view of this the review petition is liable to be allowed and the order passed by this court dated May 24, 1985 is liable to bet set aside. Accordingly, the review petition is allowed and the order passed by this court dated May 24, 1985 is set aside, and, as a result, the plaintiff is declared to be a Bhumidhar with non-transferable rights.