JUDGMENT Jawahar Lal Gupta, J. (Oral) - On September 20, 1989, the petitioner filed an application for correction of the Khasra Girdawari in respect of land measuring 9 Kanals 2 Marlas. On three occasions, the Assistant Collector, IInd Grade dismissed the application. Final order in this behalf was passed on May 19, 1993. The petitioner challenged this order. Vide order dated August 16, 1994, the Collector accepted the appeal. Respondent No. 5 filed an appeal before the Commissioner, which was dismissed vide order dated April 20, 1995. By order dated August, 1, 1996, the Financial Commissioner accepted the revision petition. A copy of this order has been produced as Annexure P4 with the writ petition. Aggrieved by the order, the petitioner has approached this Court through the present writ petition. He prays that the impugned order be set aside. 2. Counsel for the parties has been heard. 3. Mr. R.S. Sangwan, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the Financial Commissioner has erred in reversing the concurrent findings recorded by the Collector and the Commissioner. It is further submitted that the Khasra Girdawari could not have been changed without notice to the petitioner. 4. The claim made on behalf of the petitioner has been controverted by Mr. Mahabir Sandhu, appearing for respondent No. 5. 5. It is the admitted position that the Assistant Collector had visited the spot, made enquiries even from small children to ascertain the truth. Thereafter, he had found as a fact that the land was being cultivated by the respondent, who was the owner. Thus, he had rejected the petitioners prayer for correction of Khasra Girdawari. It is true that this order was reversed by the Collector and the Commissioner. However, the Financial Commissioner has found good reasons for accepting the revision. It has been noticed that the petitioner had approached the Civil Court. He had also sought help for getting the possession of the land. This situation could have arisen only when he was not in possession. Not otherwise. Still further, it has also been noticed by the Financial Commissioner that three different Assistant Collectors had made spot inspections at different times in "different years......". They had even made enquiries from the small children. In view of these facts, it has been held that the view taken by the Collector and the Commissioner, setting aside the decision of the Assistant Collector was absolutely unjustified. 6. They had even made enquiries from the small children. In view of these facts, it has been held that the view taken by the Collector and the Commissioner, setting aside the decision of the Assistant Collector was absolutely unjustified. 6. We are satisfied that there is no error in the order of the Financial Commissioner, which may need intervention of this Court in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. He has taken a possible view. It is not perverse. It is not contrary to any statute or the evidence on record. Thus, it calls for no interference. 7. Mr. Sangwan has further contended that the Khasra Girdawari was altered without any notice. Thus, the authorities have erred in rejecting his claim. 8. It is the petitioners own case that he was forcibly dispossessed from the land. Once he was dispossessed, it is in the very nature of things that respondent No. 5 shall take the possession. If the 5th respondent had actually cultivated the land, the Girdawari had to be in his name. The change was on account of alteration of the situation. It depicted the facts, as they existed. For such a purpose, no notice is required. Still further, as observed by the Financial Commissioner, the 5th respondent had taken the possession when the land was lying vacant. Whatever be the actual position, the findings recorded by the Assistant Collector, which were based on spot inspections and even accepted by the Financial Commissioner, call for no interference at this stage. 9. No other point has been raised. 10. In view of the above, we find no merit in this writ petition. It is consequently dismissed. Petition dismissed.