1992 PLP 444 (CLC)

Malik Talib Hussain for Respondent No.1. Date of hearing: 23rd August, 1990. This is a revision petition filed against the order dated 14‑9‑1988 of the Additional Commissioner (Revenue), Multan Division, Multan by which he rejected the appeal of the petitioner and upheld the order dated 10‑6‑1984 of the Deputy Commissioner/Collector Vehari, resuming the State land with the directions that Assistant Commissioner/Collector, Mailsi, should take over the possession and impose Tawan upon the illegal occupants.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the Cooperative Farming Society of Chak No.125/WB, Tehsil Mailsi, District Vehari vide its resolution No.2 dated 15‑7‑1971 held the petitioner ineligible for retention of State land measuring 20 Kanals 6 Marlas comprising Khasra Nos.59/1‑10‑11‑12 situated in Chak No.125/WB and recommended his ejectment under section 32 of Colonization of Government Lands Act, 1912. Accepting this resolution, the Assistant Commissioner/Collector, Mailsi, by his order dated 14‑9‑1971 directed the Naib Tehsildar to take over possession in favour of the Cooperative Farming Society. This was done on 15‑10‑1971.

3. Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 14‑9‑1971 of the Assistant Commissioner/Collector, Mailsi, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Commissioner, Multan Division, Multan who vide his order dated 10‑12‑1971 held that although petitioner and others were not regular members/tenants of the Society, it would be harsh to dislodge them after such a long time provided they nay the rent as due from them for the present occupancy failing which the Society will be entitled to proceed against them under the Tenancy Act.

4. Consequently the petitioner remained in possession of the impugned land till Rabi, 1976 when the Cooperative Farming Society took over the possession of the same. The respondent was given the possession of the disputed land in Kharif 1978 and remained in possession till Rabi, 1984 whereafter it is alleged that the petitioner again forcibly occupied Khasra No. 59/1 2‑6 and Khasra No. 59/10 5‑0 whereas the respondent has been shown as occupant upon other Khasra No,. from Kharif, 1984 to Rabi,1989.

5. The petitioner then gave an application to the Deputy Commissioner/Collector, Vehari alleging that the respondent was occupying, the impugned land without authority and the Deputy Commissioner/Collector, Vehari vide his order dated 10‑6‑1984 directed the. Assistant Commissioner/Collector, to resume the State land occupied by both parties, illegally under section 32 of Colonization of Government Lands Act. 1912 and imposing Tawan upon the unauthorised occupants since the date of their unauthorised possession. Appeal against the orders was filed before the Additional Commissioner (Revenue). Multan Division Multan who vide his order dated 14‑9‑1988 dismissed the same. Hence this revision petition.

6. I have heard he arguments advanced by both the parties and gone through the record produced by the Chak Manager and the Colony Clerk in a the Court today. The record of the Court file has also been perused. The main contention of the petitioner is that he was allotted the impugned land and rent was being paid by him regularly. The respondent had illegally occupied the same although he was a permanent resident of 131/WB and could not have been leased out the land in another estate. In support he produced copies of electoral rolls for Chak 1.31 /WB which included the names of the respondent and his brothers.

7. The learned counsel for the respondent contended that he was a regular lessee of the impugned land as confirmed by the Additional Commissioner (Revenue), Multan Division, Multan. He was a permanent resident of Chak 125/WB and it was on this basis that the Cooperative Farming Society had leased out the impugned State land to him. I have considered the arguments and facts of the case as on record. The explanation by the respondent that he was permanent resident of both the Chaks is not satisfactory. However it is also apparent that the petitioner did not comply with the order of the Commissioner dated A 10‑12‑1971 which still holds the field. He did not pay the rent till 1980 and was got 1‑jceted from the impugned land by the Cooperative Farming Society. In the circumstances the case is remanded to the Assistant Commissioner/Collector Mailsi who will check the cultivating possession of the petitioner Allah Wasaya from 1971, with special reference to the year 1977 onwards. He will also verify the correct permanent residence of respondent Ahmad Nawaz, and whether he was eligible to be granted temporary lease in Chak 125/WB. Thereafter the case should be decided afresh on merits. The present petition is accepted to the above extent and disposed of accordingly. AA./392/R Case remanded.