1998 PLP 1323 (CLC)

A.R Tayyab for Petitioners. M. Ashraf Akhtar for Respondent No.

1. Respondents Nos.2 to 28: Ex pane. Date of hearing: 28th April, 1997. Instant petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 has been filed for declaring order dated 6‑5‑1975 passed by Additional Deputy Commissioner (General) as illegal, void and ineffective upon the rights of the petitioners.

2. Briefly stated the facts are that Mst. Bibi Rani, widow of Abdur Rehman, propositus of respondents Nos. 19 to 25 being evacuee owner filed Claims Nos.6715 and 6716 in respect of land left by her in villages Khakan Wali and Roranwali, Tehsil Fazalka District Ferozpur (India). After her claims were verified by the Central Record ‑Room, she was proposed land in various Khatas in RL‑11 Nos.69,119, 144, 154 and 175, which was finally allotted to her vide orders dated 12‑11‑1958, 5‑7‑1959, 28‑1‑1960 and 27‑12‑1963. After her death, land devloved upon her son Abdul Haq and through other transactions on Saddo. Later on, Abdul Haq transferred the land in favour of his sons and wife, described as respondents Nos. 19 to 25, while the property of Saddo was transferred to respondents Nos.26 to

28. Petitioners Nos.l and 2 i.e. Muhammad Bilal and Muhammad Ashraf purchased land measuring 578 Kanals from respondents Nos.19, 20 and 24 vide sale‑deed dated 2‑11‑1974 for Rs.2,30,000 and Mutation No.464 entered on 25‑11‑1974 was sanctioned in their favour on 4‑12‑1974. Similarly, petitioners Nos.3 and 4 also purchased land measuring 71 Kanalas, 14 Marlas from respondents Nos. 19 to 24 vide sale deed dated 21‑7‑1972 for a sum of Rs.18,821.75 and Mutation No.419 was entred and attested on 23‑10‑1972 and 12‑2‑1973 respectively. It is alleged that respondents Nos.2 to 18 moved an application under sections 10 and 11 of the Displaced Persons Land Settlement Act, 1958 on 29‑6‑1974 before the Additional Deputy Commissioner(G)/Additional Settlement Commissioner (Lands) in respect of land allotted to Mst. Bibi Rani. The enquiry revealed that Mst. Bibi Rani was entitled to claim 16204 Produce Units, whereas she had been allotted 17436 Produce Units and thereby she had been allotted 1232 Produce Units in excess of her entitlement. Accordingly, the Additional Deputy Commissioner(G)/Additional Settlement Commissioner (Lands) vide order dated 6‑5‑1975 ordered the deducit6n of 937 Produce Units out of Khatas Nos. 175 and 154 and 295 Produce Units out of Khata No. 144 of the land allotted to Mst. Bibi Rani, the original allottee. Hence this writ petition.

3. The precise grievance of the petitioners is that order dated 6‑5‑1975 passed by respondent No. l Additional Deputy Commissioner(G)/Additional Settlement Commissioner (Lands) has been passed without impleading them parties and they have been condemned unheard, so the said order is illegal, void and ineffective upon their rights. Conversely, their stand has been controverted by the learned A.A.‑G. appearing on behalf of respondent No. 1.

4. Admittedly, respondents Nos. l and 2 had purchased land measuring 578 Kanals vide sale‑deed dated 2‑11‑1974 for a sum of Rs,30,000 on the basis of which Mutation No.464 was entered on 25‑11‑1974 and attested on 4‑12‑1974. Similarly, petitioners Nos.3 and 4 purchased land measuring 71 Kanals, 14 Marlas vide sale‑deed dated 21‑7‑1972 and Mutation No.419 was sanctioned on 12‑2‑1973. Perusal of Mutations Nos.464 and 419 reveal that land has been purchased out of Khatas Nos.57 and 58, whereas land cancelled vide I order dated 6‑5‑1975 falls in Khatas Nos. 175, 154 and

144. Thus, the rights of the petitioners have not been affected by the impugned order.

5. As a sequal to the above discussion, it is clear that the petitioners have got no cause of action to file this writ petition. Consequently, writ petition fails and is dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. A.A./M‑569/L Petition dismissed