1987 PLP 195 (SCMR)

Ch. Inayat Ullah, Advocate Supreme Court and Jamil Ahmad, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents. Date of hearing: 7th December, 1986. SHAD SAOOD JAN, J.‑‑ This petition for special leave to appeal x is directed against the judgment and order dated 11‑6‑1986 of the Lahore High Court whereby the order dated 12‑6‑1976 of the Settlement Commissioner was declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect.

2. The dispute in this petition relates to a Katri located in Lunda Bazar, Lahore. It comprised a large number of residential and commercial units. When the settlement operations started the residential accommodation was in the possession of 13 different persons including the petitioner as well as respondent No.

1. The petitioner and two others filed claim forms for the transfer of the units in their respective possession. Respondent No.1 who was a local did not make any such application. A Deputy Settlement Commissioner divided the residential accommodation into 13 units and, after numbering them he transferred unit No.5 to the petitioner and 3 other units to two other claimants. As regards the remaining units he directed that these be disposed of through auction. Among the units to be auctioned was unit No.4 which was in the possession of respondent No.1 whose name was wrongly recorded as Jalal Din instead of Jalal Masih. Before the auction could be held Scheme No. VIII became operative. Respondent No. l applied for the transfer of the unit under his occupation. His prayer was allowed and the said unit was transfer to him by the. Deputy Settlement Commissioner. The petitioner challenged the order of the Deputy Settlement Commissioner before the Settlement Commissioner contending that the unit given to respondent No.1 had already been transferred to him. The Settlement Commissioner accepted his contention and by an order dated 12‑6‑1976 set aside the order of the Deputy Settlement Commissioner.

3. Respondent No.1 invoked the constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court to challenge the order of the Settlement Commissioner. His case was that the unit in his possession was never transferred to the petitioner and that it was still available for disposal when he applied for its transfer under Scheme No.VIII. A learned single Judge in the High Court accepted the writ petition and declared the order of the learned Settlement Commissioner to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect.

4. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner before us that the portion in possession of respondent No.1 had already been transferred to him and that he had also obtained a permanent transfer deed. After the transfer respondent No.1 had executed even a rent note in his favour. That being, the subsequent transfer of a portion of the property given to him in favour of respondent No.1 was entirely illegal. 5.It will be seen that the only question for consideration is if the unit now transferred to respondent No.1 had already been transferred by the Deputy Settlement Commissioner to the petitioner. We have before us the order of the Deputy Settlement Commissioner, dated 11‑10‑1960 whereby the claim form submitted by the petitioner was disposed of Along with this order is Annexure‑A If the order of the Deputy Settlement Commissioner is read along with Annexure‑A, it will become quite clear that the unit No.5 alone which consisted of two rooms was transferred to the petitioner. Similarly, unit No.4 which too consisted of two rooms was in the occupation of respondent No.1. The Deputy Settlement Commissioner transferred to the petitioner only unit No.5 and directed that unit No.4 be put to auction alongwith some other units. It will also to be noticed that in the C.H. Form submitted by the petitioner he had asked for the transfer of the property in his possession only. It will thus appear that: unit No.4 did not form part of the property transferred to the petitioner. Its subsequent transfer to respondent No.1 was, therefore unexceptionable. 6.For the reasons stated above we find no merit in this petition. Leave to appeal is accordingly refused. S. Q. Leave refused.