1994SCMR1864 (PLP)

(b) Evacuee Property and Displaced Persons Laws (Repeal) Act (XIV of 1975)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑S. 2‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185‑‑‑Entitlement to allotment of land‑‑‑Extent‑‑‑Appellants were entitled to allotment of land equivalent to specified produce index units in preference to respondent, as order of High Court holding so, had attained finality‑‑‑Excess land allotted to appellants beyond specified units‑‑‑Order of cancellation passed by competent authority as a result of inquiry conducted in the matter was legally justified‑‑‑After adjustment of specified units in favour of appellants out of land in question, pending claim of respondent merited adjustment by concerned authorities. Muhammad Munir Peracha, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellants. Muhammad Yaqoob Sabir, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents. Date of hearing: 1st February, 1994. MANZOOR HUSSAIN SIAL, J‑‑‑Muhammad Sultan and others have by leave of this Court assailed the order dated 6‑7‑1992, of the Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench whereby their Writ Petition No. 346‑R/1992 was dismissed in limine.

2. The relevant facts in brief, giving rise to this appeal are that the predecessor‑in‑interest of the appellants obtained allotment of land measuring 599 Kanals and 13 Marlas at Khata No.4, RL II, in Village Chhutta Bhuk Auttar, Tehsil and District Bahawalnager, against Claim No. 2014 and Claim No. 186554. Later on, some one laid information with the Enforcement Department that the claimants had obtained allotment of land by misrepresentation. As result of inquiry the Deputy Commissioner, Bahawalnagar on 15‑4‑1960, directed the cancellation of Claim Form No.186554. The Assistant Rehabilitation Commissioner vide order dated 30‑4‑1960 cancelled the allotment of land. Out of the cancelled area 112 Kanals of land was confirmed on 1‑12‑1960, in favour of Hakim Ali, the father of Ghulam Muhammad respondent No.2 at Khata RL II No.

83. The appellants challenged the cancellation of their allotment of land through Writ Petition No.270‑R/1963, which was accepted on 17‑1‑1966, with the observation that out of the disputed area the appellants are entitled to retain land equivalent to 1363 P.I. Units.

3. The Revenue Authorities, however, implemented the order of the High Court dated 17‑1‑1966, after over a decade viz. 6‑11‑1978, and allotted 200 Kanals of land to the appellants including 86 Kanals out of 112 Kanals earlier confirmed on 1‑12‑1960, at Khata No. 83, RL II, in favour of Hakam Ali.

4. Neither Hakim Ali nor for that matter even his son Ghulam Muhammad respondent agitated against the order of the High Court dated 17‑1‑1966, whereby the appellants were held entitled to retain land equivalent to 1,363 units.

5. The appellants claim that they were entitled to complete adjustment of their claim equivalent to 1,363 units out of the resumed land or at least entitled to purchase the available land in satisfaction of their outstanding 565 units which was illegally rejected by the Revenue Authorities as well as by the learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court.

6. On 30‑3‑1993, leave to appeal was granted by this Court to consider "whether the petitioners were entitled to ask for allotment of 86 Kanals of land which was in their possession against balance of unsatisfied P.I. Units in terms of the order of the High Court of Lahore dated 17‑1‑1966, in Writ Petition No.270‑R/1963, and otherwise the appellants had a preferential claim over this land being in possession of the same under the present policy of allotment of evacuee land".

7. Undoubtedly the appellants were entitled to allotment of land equivalent to 1,363 P.I. Units in preference to respondent No.2, as the order of the High Court dated 17‑1‑1966, holding so, had attained finality. As regards excess land allotted to the appellants beyond 1,363 units, the order of cancellation passed by the competent authority as a result of inquiry held in the matter was legally justified. We, therefore, hold that after the adjustment of 1,363 units in favour of the appellants out of 599 Kanals and 13 Marlas of land,, the pending claim of respondent No.2 merited adjustment by the authorities concerned. Order accordingly. Subject to the observation, made above this appeal is accepted with no order as to costs. AA./M‑2049/S Order accordingly.