1991 PLP 1443 (CLC)

A.S. Hashmi for Respondent No.

1. Date of hearing: 6th May, 1991. This order shall dispose of: (1) W.P.No.3 of 1991 titled Fateh Khan v. Member (Colonies), B.O.R. etc. (2) W.P. No.4 of 1991 titled Muhammad Yaqub v. Member (Colonies) B.O.R. etc. (3) W.P. No.5 of 1991 titled Fateh Khan v. Member (Colonies), B.O.R. etc. (4) W.P.No.6 of 1991 titled Rafi Ullah v. Member (Colonies), B.O.R. etc. together as common questions of law and facts arise in all these matters.

2. Shortly stated, the facts of the case are that the petitioners were given the land in question on lease basis in the year 1976. The petitioners are in the cultivating possession of the land. On 29‑3‑1981, the learned Collector, Bhakkar, decided the controversy by saying that ownership rights of the land shall be given to the petitioners provided they pay its price. It was directed that the first instalment of the price shall be paid by the petitioners on 1‑7‑1983. It is contended by the learned counsel that the petitioners have almost paid the entire price of the land to the Government. In support of the plea, the learned counsel has relied upon Annexures `D' and `E' showing payment of the sale‑price. It has also been brought to my notice that Fateh Khan, Muhammad Yaqub and Muhammad Ameen (deceased represented by Fateh Khan) have not paid their last instalments. The petitioners are present and state that they are ready to pay the last instalment immediately. Muhammad Aslam Senior Clerk in the Office of the D.C. Bhakkar is present with record. He concedes that the petitioners have paid the entire price minus the last instalment. The respondents are not present despite service. It appears that the contesting respondents are no more interested to pursue this case. Accordingly, ex parte proceedings shall be taken again them.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and representative of the D.C. at some length. I am of the view that proprietary rights were given to the petitioners on 29‑3‑1984 by the Collector and that almost the entire price has been paid by them to the Government minus the last instalment. A categorical statement has been made by the learned counsel that the petitioners shall immediately pay the last instalment of the remaining price. It has also been conceded by the representative of the respondents that the entire price has been received by the Government minus the last instalment. Learned Law Officer and the representative of the respondents are unable to oppose the petition substantially. It also appears that order dated 29‑3‑1984 is final and that it was never assailed by any interested party. This being so, the petitioners cannot be deprived of their ownership rights of the land in question. Accordingly, a direction is issued to respondents Nos.l and 2 to give ownership rights to the petitioners, after receiving the last instalment of the remaining price of the land. With this observation, these petitions are allowed with no orders as to costs. H.B.T./F‑262/L Petitions allowed.