P L D 1972 Rev (PLP)

Saghir Ahmad Colony Clerk and Muhammad Ashraf Patwari with Record. This a revision petition against the order dated 21‑1‑1970 by which the Additional Commissioner, Rawalpindi accepted the appeal of the respondent and remanded the case to the Collector, Gujrat.

2. Brief facts are that Ahata No. 1 measuring 1 kanal situated in Chak No. 48 Tehsil Phalia district Gujrat stood reserved for Dera Deh. It was allotted by the Collector in the name of District Council, Gujrat on 9‑6‑1964 for running a Girls Primary School. Mutation No. 212 was also sanctioned on 10‑1‑1965. On 30‑1‑1965 Abdur Rehman respondent applied to the Collector for the allotment of this Ahata on the ground that no school was being run in the site, and that it was also not suitable for a school. It was reported by the Tehsildar in his report dated 17‑51969 that the Union Council bad spent a sum of Rs. 2,500 over the construction of a room but the school had not started functioning. He, therefore, recommended that the said Ahata be allotted to the respondent after he pays Rs. 2,500 to the Union Council. The Collector by his order dated 13‑8‑1969 turned down this recommendation. The respondent challenged this order before the Additional Commissioner, Rawalpindi who accepted the appeal on 21‑1‑1970 with the following direction:‑ "I accept the appeal, cancel the allotment in favour of school and remand the case to the Collector with the direction that the necessity of appellant and providing an alternate site for the school may be examined after hearing the appellant and the representative of the school authorities." Hence this revision petition by Chairman Union Council.

3. I have heard the learned counsels for the petitioner and respondent, heard the respondent himself and his statement has also been recorded. According to the statement of the respondent he is working as Head Constable in Rawalpindi for the last several years and living there with his family. His father secured one square of land in Chak No. 48 Tehsil Phalia which has been inherited by him and his brother in equal shares. His brother serves in the Army whose family lives in Tehsil Chakwal. The land in Chak 48 is cultivated by tenants. His father was allotted Ahata No. 16 alongwith the agriculture land Since disputed Ahata No. 1 is opposite Ahata No. 16 the res?pondent is anxious to secure its allotment. According to the statement of the respondent no allotment has been made of the disputed Ahata in his favour but he has occupied it since no school was being run. At present both Ahata No. 16 and the disputed Ahata are in use of his tenants. According to the statement of the Patwari and the respondent himself, the Girls School is now functioning in the village since 1970 and a teachress is also posted, but since no Ahata for the school is available the school is being held sometimes in one Ahata and sometimes in the other. The respondent however stated before me that he is prepared to pay not less than Rs. 2,500 and if necessary even more for the construction of the school in any other Ahata. But according to the statement of the Patwari there is no vacant Ahata available within the village Abadi and that Ahata site will have to be found outside the village Abadi out of the Chiragh area.

4. I have given due consideration to all the facts and arguments brought out from either side. It is accepted that the Additional Commissioner (Revenue) passed his order ex parte in favour of the respondent without giving the residents or the representatives of the Chak any chance to say anything in this respect. His order is therefore neither good in law nor shows complete understanding of the facts and circumstances of the case. The Additional Commissioner (Revenue's) order dated 21‑9‑1970 is, therefore, annulled and set aside.

5. The position, as appears in this case, is that the petitioner is anxious to secure the Ahata site opposite his father's Ahata site No.

16. But the question that has to be considered is the relative merits of private convenience to that of the convenience of the people of the Chak, The disputed Ahata site has been reserved from the very beginning for a community purpose of Dera Deh and the School is also in fulfilment of a community purpose. There is already a building constructed for the school on the site, but this building could not be used for the school as the respondent has occupied it unauthorisedly and the school is now without a regular building and site. It would, therefore, be very much against the morale of the residents of the Chak and against equity and public convenience if the interest of the respondent was given a higher priority and the school building allotted to him for his personal use while the school remains without building and a site. Under these circum?stances the Ahata site No. 1 in dispute should remain reserved and allotted for the school and should be used as such. The un?authorised possession of the respondent should immediately be vacated, and the school shifted to the site immediately.

6. In order to accommodate the respondent's desire to have one more Ahata site adjacent to his existing Ahata site No. 16, the Commissioner may sanction an Ezadi line in the village on the north where Ahata No. 16 is situated and allot him the Ahata next to Ahata No. 16 from the Ezadi line. Orders should be issued and the parties be informed accordingly. Order accordingly.