1991 PLP 1328 (SCMR)

‑‑‑‑Ss. 10 & 11‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.l85(3)‑‑‑Allotment of land, cancellation of‑‑‑Allotment of land in question duly made in favour of respondent, subsequently was cancelled by Settlement Authority without hearing respondent on the ground that he was not in possession of land in question‑‑ Possession of respondent who was claimant allottee, over land in question not being essential condition for confirmation of his allotment, Appellate Authority as well as High Court, held, rightly confirmed allotment of respondent‑‑‑Auction of land in question made in favour of petitioner after cancellation of allotment of respondent, having never been confirmed in his favour, petitioner had rightly been held to have no right to file Constitutional petition or Intra‑Court appeal against order of confirmation made in favour of respondent. Malik Talib Hussain Awan, Advocate Supreme Court and Sh. Salahuddin, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondents. S. USMAN ALI SHAH, J.‑‑‑Muhammad Hayat petitioner filed this petition for leave to appeal against the order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 25‑2‑1986 whereby his Intra‑Court Appeal against the order of a learned Single Judge of the High Court, passed in Writ‑Petition No.443‑R of 1976, was dismissed. Muhammad Shakar respondent No.l was allotted the land in dispute measuring 67 kanals vide R.L.11 of village Kud Lathi Ara, Tehsil Shahpur District Sargodha on 11‑6‑1973. This allotment was cancelled by the Deputy Settlement Commissioner on the ground that the claimant was not in possession of the property in dispute. The said property was auctioned in favour of the petitioner but was still to confirm by the Addl. Settlement Commissioner. However, on a memo from the Chief Settlement Commissioner the land in dispute was confirmed in the name of respondent No.l on 8‑3‑1975. The auction made in favour of the petitioner which was yet to be confirmed was disapproved. Civil suit of the petitioner against this order was dismissed on 12‑5‑1975. Thereafter, writ petition and I.C.A. both of the petitioner were also dismissed, the later one on ' 25‑2‑1986. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record of the case. We have observed that the allotment in favour of the respondent No.l was made on 11‑6‑1973 which was to be confirmed after 15 days but the same was not done accordingly. The allotment in question was cancelled without hearing the claimant allottee on the ground that the claimant was not in possession. We think that the respondent was a claimant allottee and his possession was not an essential condition for confirmation. On the other hand the auction in favour of the petitioner had never been confirmed, therefore, he has rightly been held to have no right to file a writ petition or intra‑Court appeal. Under the circumstances, we are of the opinion that the orders passed by the learned High Court in both writ petition and I.C.A. are unexceptionable and need no interference. by this Court. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed. H.B.T./M‑1155/S Petition dismissed.