1988 PLP 1675 (MLD)

The case of the petitioners is that amongst others they were allotted Khasras Nos. 490 and 491 at Khata No. 135 and Khasras Nos. 492 and 493 at Khata No. 136 of village Charrar, Tehsil and District Lahore, by the Additional Settlement Commissioner on 17‑6‑1971 and 30‑6‑1971. They filed an appeal before the Settlement Commissioner saying that the aforesaid area was not good and they should be given some better land m lieu thereof. The plea was accepted by the Settlement Commissioner who directed that the petitioners be allotted alternate land equivalent to the area on high priority basis. This is dated 25‑4‑ 1972. The petitioners were not given alternate land when they filed the afore‑titled writ petition.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has come round to say that the petitioners are not to be given alternate land, let their own land which they had surrendered, be restored to them.

3. Learned counsel for the Settlement Department has submitted that the land m question the petitioners had themselves surrendered and no alternate land could be given to them because the allotments have been banned and secondly, the law under which the allotment could be made had itself been repealed vide Act XIV of 1975. It is further submitted that the land in question has become building site by virtue of a Notification issued in 1973 and this notification holds true.

4. From the facts stated above it would be quite clear that the petitioners had gone to the Settlement Commissioner to say that some of the land given to them was not good and they should be given better land. The Settlement Commissioner accepted the plea. Better land not being given in consequence of the judicial order of the Settlement Commissioner passed in 1972 right uptil now, the petitioners have come to the stage that their learned counsel says that if no I better land is to be given to there, then their o\in lard \~hich they had given up for 1 better land, be restored to them. There cannot be any possible objection to that. The fact that a ban has been imposed on the fresh allotments or that the area has been declared as building site to 1973 is not fatal because the ban had been imposed much after the order of the Settlement Commissioner passed on appeal. The order of the Settlement Commissioner had to be given effect to and since that is not being given effect to by the Settlement Authorities, it is obvious that the petitioners cannot be deprived of what they possessed. In this view of the matter, it is directed that the petitioners shall be restored their aforesaid Khasra numbers earlier allotted in their favour. The petition is thus accepted with costs. M.Y.H./2515/L Petition accepted.