P L D (Rev (PLP)

A notice is only necessary in a case where the breach is capable of rectification. In this particular case, the grantee, according to the com plaints recorded against him, has been guilty of breach of conditions ever since the grant was made to him. He has not been properly maintaining the mare and its breed from the very start, and I do not see how these breaches of conditions could be rectified. Barkat Ali Khan, for Appellant. S. A. Kareem, for Respondent, with the Respondent. AKHTER HUSSAIN, F. C.‑

This is an appeal by the Remount Officer Montgomery, against the order, dated 6th January, 1949, of the Commis sioner. Multan Division, by which he set aside order of resumption of the horse‑breeding grant of Jamadar Sultan Ahmad, passed by the Collector of Montgomery on 17th August, 1948. The facts are that Jamadar Sultan Ahmad of Chak No. 8/11‑L was granted a horse‑breeding square in 1931. The lease expires on 5th August, 1951, On 10th January, 1948, the District Remount Officer sent a long list of complaints recorded against Jamadar Sultan Ahmad right from 1934 to 1948, and stated that if this man is allowed to remain a Ghoripal, this will be an encouragement to bad breeders. He, recommended that the tenancy be confiscated forthwith. It appears from the record that the Colony Assistant recorded the statement of Sultan Ahmat, who also submitted an application, dated 13th January, 1948, and the only objec tion he had to submit was that the mare, regarding the unsatisfactory management of which the complaints were made, was old and could not digest food, and that in spite of leis requests he has not been allowed to change it. The Collector signed an order probably written by his Reader, dated 19th July, 1948, by which he allowed three months to Sultan Ahmed to bring the mare up to a proper condition, but later on he scored off his signature and passed an order of confiscation on 17th August, 1948. This is a most extraordinary procedure for which an explanation of the Collector should have been obtained. In appeal, the learned Commissioner has stated that under section 24 of the Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act, V of 1912, the order of resumption of the tenancy could not be passed by the Collector unless the tenant was given a written notice to rectify the breach of the conditions of the tenancy within a reasonable time, not being less than one month. He overlooked the fact that such a notice is only necessary in case where the breach is capable of rectification. In this particular case, the grantee, according to the complaints recorded against him, has been guilty of breach of conditions ever since the grant was made to him. He has not been properly maintaining the mare and its breed from the very start, and I do not see how these breaches of con ditions could be rectified. According to his own admission, over a periods of 20 years he has been able to supply only two foals to the Remount Department. I, therefore, hold that no written notice was necessary under section 24 of the Colonization of Government Lands Act. Again, there is no question of giving the grantee time to change a better mare for fulfilling the conditions of the grant. According to the conditions of the grant, if a mare becomes incapable of bearing foals to, become remounts for the army, it is for the tenant to‑produce another mare for breeding remounts for the approval of the Remount Officer. This Jamadar Sultan Ahmad has failed to do. I am surprised that this grant was not resumed long ago. The grantee, as it appears from his record, is a very unsuitable person to continue to hold the grant, and it would be defeating the very purpose for which the grant was given, if it is not immediately resumed. I, therefore, accept the appeal of the Remount Officer and restore the order of the Collector confiscating the grant. K. M. A. Appeal accepted.