PROVINCE OF PUNJAB Through Collector, Faisalabad And Others vs ALI
This matter arises from appeals against a judgment of the Lahore High Court that allowed constitutional petitions regarding the acquisition of proprietary rights in State land by allottees under the ejected tenant scheme. The core legal question concerned the legality of denying the purchase of State land exceeding a specific limit. Based on a change in government policy and a compromise reached between the parties, the Supreme Court disposed of the appeals by permitting the allotment of the excess land subject to the fulfillment of prescribed conditions and payments. The Court held that the precise amount to be paid by the respondents under the revised policy should be determined by the competent authorities after affording an opportunity of hearing, keeping open the question of calculation. The principle laid down is that administrative authorities must apply revised government policies regarding land disposal fairly and consistently, ensuring equal treatment to similarly situated parties.
- Whether allottees under the ejected tenant scheme are entitled to purchase State land in excess of the prescribed limit upon a change in government policy?
- How should the market value and additional charges for excess State land be calculated upon the adoption of a revised government policy?
ORDER
1. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAHJ.--These two matters Civil Appeal No.9 of 1987 and Civil Petition No. 143 of 1980 (converted into appeal) arise out of the same judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 30- 9-1979; whereby respondents' Constitutional Petitions regarding the acquisition of proprietary rights in State land, were allowed.
2. As the hearing has resulted into an agreed order, therefore, it is not necessary to give the details of the facts and proceedings. The respondents who were allottees of State land under ejected tenant scheme were denied the right to purchase the whole of the area under their tenancy. They filed writ petitions which were allowed with the finding that petitioners had acted without lawful authority in declining the grant of proprietary rights regarding the area which was in excess of 64 Kanals and 6 Marlas in each tenancy.
3. A similar case came before this Court earlier (Civil Appeal No. 12 of 1987 Mr. A.K. Khalid, Member Board of Revenue (Colonies) Punjab, Lahore, etc. v. Rehmat A.I. The parties entered into a compromise whereupon the following agreed order of disposal of the appeal was passed: "This petition is directed against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, dated 30-9-1979; whereby respondent's Constitutional Petition regarding grant of proprietary rights in Government land, was allowed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that since the filing of this petition there has been a change in Government policy regarding the subject-matter of this case and that now the petitioners would have no objection to the grant of excess land subject to the fulfilment of certain conditions.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent has agreed that his client would fulfil the conditions.
6. Accordingly, both the learned counsel and Mr. Muhammad Shafi, Senior Clerk, Colony Lease Branch, Board of Revenue, Lahore, have presented a compromise signed by each one of them with a view to be made into an order of this Court.
7. There shall be no order as to costs."
8. The compromise referred in the above-reproduced order reads as follows ; "Both the parties agreed that the excess land which is disputed measuring 40 Kanals 17 Marlas be allotted to the respondent on payment of average market price of the preceding 12 months of the Chak plus double the rent from the date of allotment and plus 10$ surcharge on account of sale by private treaty in view of the letter No. 6308/$3/2159/CL-III, dated 18-7-1983.
9. (Sd.)(Sd.)
10. Ch. Muhammad Ashraf Azeem,Gulzar Ahmad Qureshi, AdvocateAdvocate for respondent.For petitioner.
11. (Sd. )
12. (Muhammad Shafi)
13. Senior Clerk Colony Lease Branch B. O. R. Lahore."
14. We, on account of the change of Government policy indicated in the order passed in Civil Appeal No.12 of 1987, converted Civil Petition No.143 of 1980 into appeal and asked A.I Ahmad respondent whether he would agree .. To the arrangement made by the parties in the previous case (Civil Appeal No.12 of 1987). He stated that he would agree to pay the amount which is found legally due for the excess area. According to him the calculation of the amount should be made with reference to the date of the application for grant of proprietary rights and not with reference to the market value at any subsequent time including the present market value.
15. Mr. Wahla, the learned counsel for Shah Muhammad respondent in Civil Appeal No.9 of 1987 took similar position and stated that his client is ready to pay the additional amount for the so-called excess land but his right to object to the manner of determination of the amount, should be kept in tact.
16. Mr. Gulzar Ahmad, learned counsel for the appellants agreed that the question of the amount to be paid by the respondents under the changed policy should be kept open to be determined by the concerned authorities after hearing the persons concerned. Accordingly, the parties in these two matters requested that in view of what has been stated by them both the appeals should be disposed of accordingly leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
17. We, therefore, dispose of the appeals accordingly There shall be no order as to costs.
18. Before parting with this matter, it needs to be observed that if a decision by the concerned authority favourable to the respondents in these two matters on the question of determination of the amount is made then it will be open for the authority to follow the same in Civil Appeal No.12 of 1987, in fairness to the respondent therein; notwithstanding his agreement to the contrary as no law would in that case bar on equal treatment to the persons concerned. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.