P L D 1966 W (PLP)

I have, however, taken up this case on merits. This order will dispose of the following two appeals :‑

(1) Sardar Ata Muhammad Khan Leghari v. State No. 616. (2) Sardar Mahmood Khan Leghari v. State No. 617.

2. The fact of this case (relating to two matters) in brief are that firstly an area of 2 acres situate in village Daggar Chit was purchased by Sardar Ata Muhammad Khan Leghari and family under section 20 of Canal and Drainage Act as early as 1955‑56 and its transfer of possession was officially given effect to, but the local revenue staff did not enter or get a mutation sanctioned to this effect before 29th September 1959. The Deputy Land Commissioner recommended the validation of this mutation. The learned Land Commissioner, Bahawalpur also validated it but on the ground that it was 'in the interest of consolidation and exchange.

3. The second case relates to an area of 6 acres situate in Mutfaraq Chahan for which it was pointed out by the petitioner to the local authorities that it remained in his possession since 1952 in lieu of a gift from his father Nawab Sir Muhammad Jamal Khan Leghari and that this area fell to his share by drawing of lots between the brothers. But this transfer was again not incorporated by the local authorities in the revenue records in his name, with the result that it still stands in the name of his brother Sardar Mahmood Khan Leghari, Petitioner in Appeal No.

617. The Land Commissioner, Bahawalpur did not agree with the contention of the petitioner and‑ rejected his claim over this area. The petitioner has come up in revision against the Land Commissioner, Bahawalpur's orders conveyed vide No. LR/1179, dated the 7th July 1960, before me.

4. I have consulted the relevant files and also the record of the Patwari. As regards issue No. 1, it is an admitted fact that a transaction did take place between the parties through the Collector and there can be no doubt that it took place well' before 8th October 1958 when Martial Law was proclaimed. He is, therefore, an "Existing Owner" of this area for the purpose of the Martial Law Regulation No. 64, although the local revenue staff did not enter it in the Revenue records. I, therefore, accept this portion of the appeal and direct that this transaction should be validated, as compulsory Land Acquisition and not as one of exchange and consolidation.

5. As regards the 6 acres of land in possession of the petitioner, I find that this area is actually shown under the ownership of Sardar Mahmood Khan Leghari in the revenue record and there is no entry or even a registered deed to support the petitioner's point of view. I have, therefore, no option but to concur with the views of the learned Land Commissioner, Bahawalpur, in this behalf. It is, however, open to the petitioner to get the revenue records corrected through a competent Court of law relating to these 6 acres of land and then approach the Land Commission authorities if necessary. The petitioners should be informed of these orders. S. Q. Order accordingly