1970 PLP 629 (SCMR)

MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, J.‑The facts on which this appeal proceeds are similar to the facts in Mehr Din and others v. Border Area Committee (Civil Appeal No. 64 of 1969), decided on 13th March 1970. The appellants are sitting allottees of evacuee land in Chak No. 92/6‑R, Tehsil Fort Abbas, District Bahawalnagar. The Border Area Committee by order dated the 30th December 1965, cancelled the allotment in the view that under the Addendum to Martial Law Regulation 9, Zone B, dated the 5th November 1960, the allotments of all claimant dis placed persons in District Bahawalnagar were to be reduced to the area hold by them as temporary allottees. The appellants thereupon filed Writ Petition No. 155 of 1966 contending inter alia that the Border Area Committee had misconstrued the Addendum as its provisions were applicable to claimants who had registered their claims or got their claims transferred to the border belt before 17th March 1959, but had till then not succeeded in obtaining allotments against their verified claims. As the allotments in favour of the appellant were confirmed long before 5th November 1960, it was claimed that the Border Area Committee acted without lawful authority in reduc ing their allotments to the land held by them temporarily. The writ petition was dismissed by a Division Bench in limine in view that in Muhammad Khan v. Border Area Committee (P L D 1965 S C 623) this Court had held "that the High Court had no jurisdiction to set aside the order made by the Border Area Committee". The effective orders in that case were however, passed during the Martial Law period which word immuned from scrutiny by the High Court under Martial Law Regulations promulgated before the 7th June 1962, which has the effect to save actions of Martial Law authority including the Border Area Committee which merely purported to be made under Regulation 9, Zone B, even though not in complained with its relevant provisions. These Regulations were replace on the promulgation of the 1962‑Constitution on the 7th June 1962, and corresponding High Courts were under Article 98 invested with the jurisdiction to make an order "(i) directing a person performing in the Province functions in connection with the affairs of the Center, the Province or a local authority to refrain from doing that which he is not permitted by law to do, or to do that which he is required by law to do; or (ii) declaring that any act done or proceeding taken in the Province by a person, performing functions in connection with the affairs of the Centre, the Province or a local authority has been done or taken without lawful authority, and is of no legal effect." The Border Area Committee is an authority performing in the Province functions in connection with the affairs of they Centre. The High Court can, therefore call for records of act done or proceeding taken by it and declare it without lawful authority and of no legal effect notwithstanding the ouster jurisdiction of the High Courts and Supreme Court in, Paras. 15 and 16 of the Martial Law Regulation 9, Zone B, 1959. The High Court has in this view failed to exercise jurisdiction vested in it by Article 98 of the Constitution. The appeal is, accordingly, allowed and reversing the decision of the High Court, we grant the appellants a decla ration that the order made by the Border Area Committee on the 30th December, 1965, cancelling their allotment of land in Chak No. 92/6‑R, Tehsil Fort Abbas, is without lawful authority and consequently void and of no legal effect. Appeal allowed.