ORDER 1. This revision petitioner has been filed under section 16 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, against the orders to set aside of commissioner, Gurgaon dated 13.09.2007, Collector, Rewari dated 26.03.2004 and that of AC-lst grade Rewari dated 14.02.2003 and prayed to accept this revision. 2. Briefly the facts of this case are that in way back 1998 one Sh. Sabha Chand alias Sobha Chand r/o village Jiwra, Tehsil and District Rewari filed partition application for his separate Khewat from the total land measuring 68 Kanal 4 marlas before Assistant Collector, 1st Grade, Rewari. During the process of partition AC 1st Grade, Rewari gave adequate hearing to both parties on mode of partition and other onward paper as such to remove objections and thereafter vide his order dated 22.12.1998 confirmed Naksha 'B'. Sh. Pyare Lal now petitioner aggrieved from the aforesaid order appealed to SDO(C)/Collector who vide his order dated 31.03.99 accepted the same and remanded this case to AC 1st Grade, Rewari to consider the case on the basis of objections raised by appellant and also to make compliance of FC order dated 17.01.1995. Accordingly AC 1st Grade Rewari called for amended Naksha ‘B’ which was confirmed on 14.02.2003 without mitigating the contention of appellant to give his share of 6 kanal 7 Marla instead of 5 Kanal 7 Marla from the mustil no. 24 and rejected his objection application. 3. Sh. Pyare Lal aggrieved from this order appealed to SDO(C)/Collector Rewari who dismissed the same vide his order dated 26.03.04 being forceless without assigning any reason to condone delay with the view that once sanad Takshim has already been issued on 25.07.2003 no appeal lies thereafter. 4. Sh. Payre Lal aggrieved filed executive Revision before Commissioner Gurgaon. Commissioner, heard arguments of both parties and perused lower courts files. In his considered views revisionist has been given 6 Kanal 18 marlas from the mustil No. 24 by confirming Naksha ‘B’ and issued sanad takshim. Ld. Commissioner dismissed the forceless time barred revision vide his order dated 13.09.2007. 5. Sh. Pyare Lal aggrieved filed revision to this court which came for hearing today, counsel petitioner in his arguments averred that his client from the mustil no. 24 has been given 5 Kanal 7 Marla only instead of his 1/3 share of 6 Kanal 18 Marla. Ld. Commissioner dismissed the forceless time barred revision vide his order dated 13.09.2007. 5. Sh. Pyare Lal aggrieved filed revision to this court which came for hearing today, counsel petitioner in his arguments averred that his client from the mustil no. 24 has been given 5 Kanal 7 Marla only instead of his 1/3 share of 6 Kanal 18 Marla. This valuable land is adjacent to the village and situated near main road, and is very precious. He also averred that other co-sharers Dharam Pal etc have been given more than their share from this mustil No. 24. He further stated that petitioner filed an objection, against naksha ‘B’ dated 14.02.2003 which was rejected without due consideration by AC 1st Grade, Rewari. 6. Having given consideration to the overall circumstances and facts of the case, it is observed that as per order of Commissioner dated 13.09.2007 Sh. Pyare Lal petitioner has been given his 1/3 share from the mustil No. 24 i.e 6 Kanal 18 Marla but as stated by counsel petitioner and perusal of AC 1st Grade, Rewari order dated 14.02.2003, the revisionist through partition proceedings has been given possession of 5 Kanal 7 Marla. The objection raised by him against this error was rejected. Under there circumstances, I remand this case to Commissioner, Gurgaon Division, Gurgaon to look into this matter of a material inconsistency. Parties are directed to appear before him by 6.07.2008. ----------------