1985 PLP 2068 (CLC)

AJMAL MIAN, J.--The petitioners have impugned the order, dated 18-10-1982 passed by respondent No. 2 i.e. (The Commissioner, Hyderabad Division) and notice for auction, dated 7-12-1982 of the agricultural land in dispute issued by respondent No. 3. i.e. (Additional Commissioner and Court of Wards Hyderabd Division). The brief facts leading to the filing of the above petition are that one Muhammad Hashim son of Haji Lakhano Sarejo owned considerable agricultural land in various Dehs including the land in dispute. Upon an application made by the son of Muhammad Hashim, the Additional Commissioner, Court of Wards Hyderabad Division with the previous sanction of the Provincial Government assumed the superintendence of the agricultural land of Muhammad Hashim mentioned in the notification gezetted on 8th October,1981. The above notification did not include the land in dispute for the reason that the matter was pending before the Commissioner, yderabad for cancellation of mutation made by the Assistant Mukhtiarkar H favour of Mst. Allah Bachai wife of said Muhammad Hashim on the in basis of the alleged gift. Aforesaid Mst. Allah Bachai and Muhammad Hashim filed C.P. No. 681 of 1981 in this Court. However, subsequently the present petitioners also became parties as petitioners in the above petition. We have disposed of the above petition by a judgment, dated 13 24985n in which it has been held that the Additional Commissioner court of Wards shall not deal with the land in dispute till the time a requisite notification is issued.

2. In the present petition the petitioners have impugned the above order of the Commissioner, dated 18-10-1982 and the above auction notice, dated 7-12-1982. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that since the sale-deed in respect of the land in dispute was registered in favour of the present petitioners on or about 22-3-1982, the Commissioner could not have passed the above impugned order, dated 18-10-1982, cancelling the mutation in favour of Mst. Allah Bachai, from whom the petitioners have purchased the land in dispute. The factum that Mst. Allah Bachai had entered into a sale agreement with the present petitioners was a matter of record before the Commissioner, Hyderabad as Muhammad Hashim's sons had caused the initiation of proceedings for assumption of the management of Muhammad Hashim's property under the Court and Wards Act. We, therefore, are of the view that the petitioners were entitled to have been heard before the impugned order could have been passed. We, therefore, remand the case to the Commissioner with the direction to re-hear the question of cancellation of the mutation after notice to the present petitioners as well as Mst. Allah Bachai and Muhammad Hashim and also to the other interest parties. .'

3. As regards the above auction notice, dated 7-12-1982, it will suffice to observe since it is an admitted position that till today no notification under the Court of Wards Act in respect of the land in dispute has been issued, the above notice for auction is without jurisdic tion. We accordingly declare the same being without lawful authority and of no legal effect. The petition stands disposed of in the above terms with no order as to costs. A.A. Petition accepted.