MUHAMMAD RAFI And Others vs MUHAMMAD MALIK And Other
This petition for leave to appeal arises out of a property dispute concerning double allotments obtained by a refugee from Jammu and Kashmir in Sialkot District. The petitioners had applied for cancellation of the double allotment held by the predecessor-in-interest of the respondents, Chiragh Din, which was accepted by the Additional Settlement Commissioner who cancelled Chiragh Din's land in village Sahowali and allotted it to the petitioners. The Settlement Commissioner dismissed the respondents' revision. Subsequently, the Lahore High Court allowed the respondents' writ petition, holding that the allotment pertained to Jammu and Kashmir refugees and was governed by a scheme precluding cancellation. The core legal question is whether the High Court erred in interfering with the discretionary orders of the settlement authorities regarding the cancellation of allotments under the relevant scheme. The Supreme Court held that the submission regarding the High Court's error is supported by precedent, and accordingly granted leave to appeal to examine the matter.
- Whether the High Court can interfere with the discretionary orders of settlement authorities regarding refugee land allotments?
- Does a refugee scheme for Jammu and Kashmir immigrants bar the cancellation of double allotments?
ORDER
1. DORAB PATEL, J.--The petitioners and one Chiragh Din (predecessor-in-interest of the respondents) are both refugees from Jammu and Kashmir and had settled in Sialkot District.
2. Chiragh Din had obtained an allotment in village Sahowali and in another village. (which is not relevant to this petition). In the events that happened, the petitioner filed an application that Chiragh Din had obtained double allotments one in the, village Sahowali and a second in another village. This application was accepted by an Additional Settlement Commissioner on 18-11-1972, who cancelled the land allotted to Chiragh Din in village Sahowali, and allotted it on the same day to the petitioners. Therefore, the respondents filed a revision which was dismissed by the Settlement Commissioner on 18-12-1973. They then challenged the orders of the Settlement authorities in a' writ petition in the Lahore High Court which was allowed by a learned Judge on the ground that the allotment pertained to refugees from Jammu and Kashmir and was based on a scheme under which it could not be cancelled. Hence this petition for leave.
3. Mr. Inayat Hussain submitted that the learned Judge erred in interfering with the exercise of discretion by the Settlement authorities and further submitted that the view taken by the High Court was contrary to this Court's judgment in Muhammad Shaft v. Settlement Commissioner (Lands) 1976 SCMR 499. As this submission appears to be supported by this Court's judgment in Muhammad Shaft's case, we grant leave to examine it. Security in the sum of Rs. 1,000 which may be paid within a period of six months. The appeal will be made ready on the present record with liberty to the parties to file additional documents, if any.