1995 PLP 473 (MLD)

Hamid Ali Mirza and Khan Muhammad Bajwa for Respondents. Date of hearing: 13th April, 1993. The petitioner is aggrieved against the action of respondent No. 1 by which the land measuring 49 Kanals, 18 Marlas in village Mahat Pura, Tehsil and District Sialkot, has been allotted to Boota, father of the petitioner.

2. Facts of the case are that the disputed land was admittedly allotted to the petitioner being J and K refugee on temporary basis and he has been permanently settled there alongwith his children. This is so certified by the report submitted by the A.C./Deputy Settlement ‑Commissioner(L), Sialkot. In 1964 a part of the claim belonging to said Boota was adjusted as against the disputed land of which the petitioner is very much aggrieved. According to him the land already allotted to him in 1947 could not have been given to his father as against part of his claim.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the land was re -allotted without cancelling the earlier allotment and without hearing the petitioner.

4. Boota has died a year back and he was also given land as against portion of his claim in village Rangpur Jattan which is exclusively in possession of the legal heirs of Boota except the present petitioner. It is admitted by the learned counsel for the respondent and the two sons of Boota, present in Court, that they will not challenge the temporary allotment of the petitioner in case he surrenders his share from 10 acres of land allotted to their father, Boota as against portion of his claim, in village Rangpur Jattan, which proposal has been accepted by Amanat Ali, Special Attorney of the petitioner in presence of his learned counsel,, Mrs. Shaista Qaisar. In view of this, the re- allotment of the disputed land on which the petitioner has been permanently settled since 1947 is declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect. According to the compromise the petitioner will not claim any share of allotment made in the name of his father in village Rangpur Jattan and similarly the respondents will not press any claim as against the petitioner from his temporary allotment. In view of above the writ petition is accepted, the disputed land is cancelled from the name of Boota and the same is restored to the petitioner. Both the learned counsel pray that Boota is entitled to the allotment of alternate land, in lieu. of the disputed one, as against his part of the claim and that a direction be issued to this effect. The request is reasonable. As the disputed land has been cancelled and restored to the petitioner, it is directed that the Board of Revenue/Chief Settlement Commissioner or a notified officer shall allot the alternate land to legal heirs of Boota accordingly. AA./M‑1790/L Order accordingly