P L D (PLP)

Muhammad Hassan for Petitioners. Fazlur Rahman Khan for Respondents. This is a revision filed against an order dated the 9th of August 1962, passed by the Additional Commissioner (Consoli dation), Lahore, whereby he accepted the revision filed by Ibrahim and remanded the case for fresh decision. The facts of the case are that the A.C.O. confirmed the scheme for this village. The scheme included the disposal of land belonging to the Gurdawara Kalan alias Singh Sabha. Ibrahim a tenant of this land, went in appeal to the A.D.C. (Consolidation) but it was rejected. He then filed a revision before the Additional Commissioner (Consolidation) and he accepted the revision and remanded the case for fresh decision. The petitioners were not parties in the previous litigation but they have come up in revision because they have been affected by the remand orders. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the record. The learned Additional Commissioner (Consolidation) disposed of six revisions by his order dated the 9th of August 1962. Only one revision of Ibrahim related to the Gurdawara land. The other five revisions had no connection with the evacuee property. Again, the learned Additional Commissioner (Consolidation) was of the view that the trust lands have either been excluded altogether or left intact in the scheme of consolidation of holdings. This view, I am afraid, is not correct. Under the orders issued with Board of Revenue's letter No. 220‑61‑98‑CHIP) dated the 21st of January 1961, the Secretary of the Evacuee Trust Board, Government of Pakistan, Lahore, was asked to appoint a representative of representatives to watch the interest of the Board in the pro ceedings before the Assistant Consolidation Officers so that these officers might be directed to issue notices in this connection to send the representatives. In his letter No. 14172/RPTC, dated the 11th of October 1961; Chairman. Evacuee Trust Board Committee, Sheikhupura that Shaikh Abdul Aziz, Revenue Assistant at Sheikhupura the estates the charge and supervision of the Board situated, was enclosed and I find that Gopi Rai where the land in dispute is situated, is one of the villages in the list. All that was necessary, therefore, was that the Consolidation Officer should issue a notice to the Revenue Assistant so that he might, if he liked, be present during the consolidation proceedings to watch the interest of the Evacuee Trust Board. It was not necessary to either exclude the land altogether or let it remain intact in the scheme of consolidation of holdings. Apart from this consideration, the other revisions could be considered on merits as they did not relate to any evacuee property. In these circumstances, I accept the revision and remand the case to the learned Additional Commissioner (Consolidation) for fresh decision. So far as the revisions relating to evacuee property are concerned, he may like to remand them for further con sideration and fresh decision after consulting the Revenue Assistant. As for the rest of the revisions, he could give decisions on merits. There is no need to set aside the entire consolidation of holdings scheme. S. Q. Revision accepted.