1991 PLP 723 (CLC)

As none of the respondents appeared before the Court on 20‑9‑1987, therefore, they were proceeded against ex parte and order for the partition of the land mentioned in the plaints according to. Naqsha "BA" and "Jneem" was made by the Assistant Collector 1st Grade/Settlement Tehsildar, Mardan on 20‑7‑1988. The above order was challenged in three separate appeals by the respondents before the Extra Assistant Settlement Officer/Collector, Mardan, who vide his order dated 9‑3‑1989 while accepting the appeals remanded the cases to the Settlement Tehsidldar/Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Mardan with the directions that all the respondents be served properly and may be given opportunity of contesting the applications by riling their written statements and all the proceedings be taken according to the provisions of the Land Revenue Act, 1967. The above order of the Extra Assistant Settlement Officer/Collector, Mardan was challenged in further appeals before the Additional Commissioner, Mardan, who vide his order dated 29‑4‑1989 dismissed the appeals. Hence the present three Revision Petitions before the Board of Revenue. Parties present. Written arguments of the counsel for the parties and record of the cases perused. From the perusal of the record of the cases it has been noticed that the partition proceedings have been completed in a very hasty manner against the provisions laid down in the Land Revenue Act, 1967. In the order‑sheet dated 25‑5‑1988 it has been ordered that the case to come up for the preparation of mode of partition on 4‑6‑1988, while in next below sentence of the same order sheet it has been mentioned that the mode of partition sanctioned and sent to the Patwari halqa. From the perusal of the plaints and the notice of proclamation served on the respondents through Daily "Mashriq" Peshawar, it has been noticed that the number of respondents and Khata numbers do not tally with each other. From the perusal of the report of the process‑server on the summons issued for 31‑8‑1987 placed on original Court file No.202/9, it reveals that Mashal Khan etc. 11 in number were stated to have expired. But their legal heirs have not been impleaded as party to the cases. The trial Court was required to ask the applicants to bring their legal heirs to represent the cases through proper service of notices upon them. In his written arguments, the counsel for petitioners has stressed on the point of limitation. While in rebuttal the counsel for respondents in his written arguments had referred to the following authorities:‑‑

(a) P L D 1973 Quetta Page 1 Citation B. (b) P L D 1970 Lahore Page 6 Citation A. (c) P L D 1969 Lahore Page 1040 Citation B. (d) P L D 1974 Lahore Page 434 Citation B. (e) P L D 1951 Lahore Page

147. After going through the record of the cases and the arguments submitted by the counsel for the parties I have come to the conclusion that the remand order dated 9‑3‑1989 of the Extra Assistant Settlement Officer/Collector, 1st Grade, Mardan is a valid order based on the cogent reasons. There seems no illegality or material irregularity in the order. Based on the above discussion, these three identical Revision Petitions of the petitioners are dismissed and the orders dated 9‑3‑1989 and 29‑4‑1989 of the Extra Assistant Settlement Officer/Collector 1st Grade, Mardan and Additional Commissioner, Mardan respectively, are maintained. Parties to bear their own costs. A.A./386/R Revisions dismissed.