Writ review cannot upset factual findings on Panchayat land possession when revenue records support disqualification.

Writ jurisdiction will not ordinarily disturb an appellate authority's factual finding where revenue records show that the petitioner himself was in possession and cultivating Panchayat land. The Court treated the jamabandis and other revenue entries as sufficient basis for the finding of disqualification as a lessee in possession, and rejected the attempt to attribute possession to the petitioner's son because no material supported that shift. As no compelling ground was shown to upset the factual conclusion, interference was declined and the disqualification finding stood.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging the appellate authority's finding that the petitioner was disqualified for being a lessee in possession of Panchayat land warranted interference.

Analysis: The appellate authority had recorded a factual finding, on the basis of the jamabandis and other revenue records, that the petitioner himself was in possession and cultivating the Panchayat land. The Court noted that in writ jurisdiction it does not sit in appeal over such findings. The petitioner's attempt to shift possession to his son was rejected on the facts, and no material was shown to justify upsetting the finding.

Conclusion: The disqualification finding was upheld and no interference was called for.

---