1977 PLP 239 (SCMR)

MUHAMMAD AKRAM, J.‑This is an appeal by special leave from the judgment dated 12th May 1959, passed by a Division Bench of the then High Court of West Pakistan at Lahore, accepting the writ petition filed by the respondents against the appellant herein. Briefly the relevant facts are these. A scheme a known as the University Campus Scheme was published in the Gazette on tie 31st March, 19.54 under section 36 of the Punjab Town Improvement Act, 1922. It was sanctioned adder section 41 of the Act by tie Provincial Government on the 24th January, 1957. In that connection, the Land Acquisition Collector made his award on the 20th September, 1960. Afterwards he made a supplementary award which related to the land of the respondents, announced on the 29th December 1952, under section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act. Admittedly, the respondents were not present at the time of making of the award. Afterwards, on the 17th August, 1963, the respondents filed their objec tions against the award under section FR of the Land Acquisition Act. But the Collector on the 10th February, 1965, treated the objections before biro as barred by time, since they were not presented within six months of the making of the award and refused to refer the same to the Tribunal for adjudication. In these circumstances, the respondents filed their writ petition under Article 98 of the abrogated Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan challenging the validity of the award dated 29th October 1962 arid the impu gned order of the Collector dated 10th February, 1965. The High Court observed that no notice was served upon the petitioner for appearance before the Collector on the 29th October, 1962, when the supplementary award was announced against the respondents herein. In its opinion, the giving of a notice under section 12 was an imperative provision of law and read with the proviso to section 18 it became obligatory upon the Collector to give notice of the award within such time as would leave enough respite to a person to file an application under section 18 within a period of six months from the date of the making of the award. If such a notice was not given it would mean noncompliance with an obligatory part of the statute and the result would be that the award given by the Collector would be vitiated and action under section 11 would be taken afresh so that a new award be made. In conclusion, therefore, the High Court accepted the writ petition and declared the award to be of no legal effect and remanded the case to the Collector for proceeding afresh under section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act. In these circumstances, the appellant filed a petition for special leave to appeal from the judgment of the High Court. In this Court, on the 23rd December, 1969, while granting leave to appeal, Ch. Muhammad Ashraf, the learned counsel for the petitioner‑appellant, stated that he had no objection if the objections filed by the respondents under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act were referred to the tribunal for disposal on the merits and agreed that the desired reference may be made by the Land Acquisition Collector to the tribunal for consideration of the objections raised by the respondents against the award. At the same time, it was contended on behalf of the petitioner‑appellant that the High Court was not justified is setting aside the award merely on the ground that notice under section 12 of the Land Acquisition Act was not given within a reasonable time after the passing of the award and that, at any rate, the award could not have been set aside even qua those who were not parties in this case. While granting leave to appeal this Court clarified that if the respondents so desired they could move the Land Acquisition Collector to refer their objections to the tribunal and that it shall be open to him to decide those objections during the pendency of this appeal. In these circumstances, at the instance of the respondents, the Land Acquisition Collector referred their objections preferred against the award to the tribunal in accordance with section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. On this now on the 3rd May, 1976, the tribunal has disposed of those objec tions after hearing on the merits and made its own award in the matter. Today, before us, Malik Mohammad Aslam, learned counsel for the respondents, stated that he did not wish to challenge and dispute the validity of the award dated 29th October, 1962 made by the Land Acquisition Collec tor. His objections against the award having been referred to the tribunal with the consent of the parties in pursuance to the order passed by this A Court, the decision has been rendered thereon by the tribunal on the 3rd May, 1976. The result is that while the said award remains in the field a prayed, the objections to the award have also been disposed of in due course by the tribunal. In the result, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, this appeal is allowed to the extent that the impugned order passed by the High Court declaring the award as without lawful authority, is set aside and the award remains in the field. At the same tine, the latest order dated 3rd May. 1976 passed by the tribunal disposing of the objections filed by the respondents against tine award has also come into play arid remains in the field. This appeal is disposed of accordingly, but there is no order as to costs in the circumstances of then case. Order accordingly.