GHULAM MUHAMMAD SAJID Versus ADDITIONAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

ORDER

Through this constitutional petition Ghulam Muhammad Sajid, Muhammad Arif, Noor Muhammad and Wajid Ali petitioners want this Court to declare the order, dated 20‑1‑1987 of the Additional Deputy Commissioner (General) /Notified Officer, Jhang to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect.

2. The dispute relates to four Plots Nos. ST‑336, ST‑335, ST‑333 and ST‑334 situate in Mauza Marzipura, Jhang Saddar. The facts leading to this petition briefly are that the petitioners claiming themselves as occupants of Plot No. ST‑335 submitted four forms for the allotment of the same under Kachi Abadi Scheme. The forms were rejected by D.S.C./Deputy Administrator, Jhang on 16‑10‑1976. Thereafter, the disputed plots were transferred to Muhammad Din respondent No. 3 through auction proceedings on 4‑7‑1978. Feeling aggrieved thereby the petitioners filed W.P. No. 802/11 of 1978 on the ground that they were condemned unheard. Fateh Muhammad respondent No. 2 also questioned the legality of the transfer of plots in favour of Muhammad Khan respondent No. 3 through W.P. No. 459/11 of 1981. Both the writ petitions were accepted by this Court and the case was sent back to the Additional Deputy Commissioner (Genl)/Notified Officer, Jhang respondent No. 1 for fresh decision in accordance with law after giving opportunity of being heard. On remand respondent No. 1 after hearing the petitioners has again rejected their forms vide impugned order dated 20‑1‑1987 with the observations that:‑

(i) The applicants Noor Muhammad etc. who had submitted their applications under Kachi Abadi Scheme were unable to maintain their possession on the land. Moreover, the land in question was not included in the relevant Notification. As such the land in question could not be allotted to them.

(ii) The auction of the plots in question was carried out without any reasonable justification. The land comprising the above four plots is in excess of the share of the Central Government in the joint holding. The auction o? plots is, therefore, cancelled. The auction purchasers will be entitled to move for the refund of the amount already deposited by them.

(iii) The title of Fateh Muhammad to the extent of 3 Kanals of land is established according to the relevant record. He will be entitled to initiate legal proceedings for the ejectment of unauthorised occupants on his share of the land."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the disputed plots form the part of Kachi Abadi; that the observations made by the Notified Officer that the petitioners were not in possession of the plots is actually wrong; that the learned Notified Officer had not properly appreciated the relevant record and that he has been enquiring with regard to Khasra No. 4241 instead of Khasra No. 3241.

4. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel' for the petitioners with care. I have not been able to persuade myself to agree with him. I find that he has not been able to controvert the observations made by the Notified Officer as reproduced above; that he has not been 'able to point out any misreading or non‑reading of record which was available before the Notified Officer at the time of the hearing; that the impugned order does not suffer from any illegality or defect of jurisdiction; that the learned Notified Officer had not flouted the provisions of relevant law and that the submissions made by the learned counsel do not make out a case for interference with the impugned order in exercise of the constitutional powers of this Court.

5. For what he has been said above, there being no merits, the petition is dismissed in limine.

H . B . T . / G‑124/ L Petition dismissed.