P L D (PLP)

Allotment‑Possession of land wrongly deli vered to petitioner‑Case already decided by Collector's prede cessor, appeal dismissed by Additional Commissioner and review pending before Board of Revenue‑Order of Collector regularising possession of allottee against orders of appellate authorities‑Held, irregular in circumstances of case. This is a reference made by the Commissioner, Sargodha Division vide his letter No. 5556/CA, dated 9‑4‑1971 seeking advice and orders regarding possession over Killas Nos. 6, 7, 8, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18 situated in Chak No. 235/JB, Tehsil and District Jhang.

2. The case has been examined under suo motu revisional jurisdiction, under section 7 read with section 164 of the Land Revenue Act.

3. The facts briefly are that one Daulat son of Piran Ditta was leased out State land under the Ejected Tenants Scheme in 1957 comprising Killas Nos. 6 to 13 of square No. 9 in Chak No. 253/JB Tehsil and District Jhang. The Patwari of the circle however, by some omission, delivered the possession of Killas Nos. 6, 7 8. 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 and

18. Daulat Ali died and the tenancy devolved on his son Muhammad Siddique.

4. In 1967, Muhammad Siddique applied to the Collector Jhang for correction of records according to his physical pos session over the disputed land. The Collector rejected his request on 22‑11‑1967 and instead a file of illicit cultivation was started against him. Muhammad Siddique preferred an appeal against this order before the Additional Commissioner and in turn a revision before the Board of Revenue which were rejected on 19‑9‑1969 and 28‑10‑1969 respectively. Some review petition remained pending with the Board of Revenue which were finally withdrawn on 18‑8‑1970.

5. During the pendency of review petition before the Board of Revenue, the matter came to the notice of Capt. Raza Ali, TQA, CSP, Collector Jhang in connection with the imposition of tawan upon Muhammad Siddique. The Collector Jhang observed in his order dated 10‑6‑1970 that the possession having been delivered to allottee by Patwari and his alleged unauthorised occupation not having been pointed out by field staff, he (allottee) could not be penalised at such a late stage. He therefore, regularised Muhammad Siddique's possession over Khasras Nos. 6, 7, 8, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 and

18. Collector further observed that the aggrieved allottee was seeking his remedy before Board of Revenue but as injustice had been done with him, the same was being rectified. He requested Commissioner to move Board of Revenue for remission of tawan. The matter has been considered keeping In view the circumstances of the case. It is considered that the petitioner should not be made to suffer for the omissions on the part A of the functionaries of the State. The petitioner's possession on Khasras Nos. 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 18 is therefore regularised and the orders passed by the Collector, Jhang imposing tawan for illicit cultivation is set aside. It may however be observed that Capt. Raza Ali Collector Jhang exceeded his jurisdiction while passing his order dated 10‑6‑

70. Not only the case hack been decided by his predecessor and appeal, dismissed by Additional Commissioner but review was also pending before BOR. Collector was not competent to interfere at this stage. At the most he could have moved BOR for review of the previous orders. Regularising the possession of allottee, against the competent order of appellate authorities was irregular. A copy of this order may be sent to Collector Jhang through the Commissioner for information and necessary action. Order should be issued accordingly. Order accordingly.