MUSHTAQ vs SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER (LAND), WITH POWERS OF CHIEF
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against an order of the Lahore High Court, which dismissed in limine a revision petition challenging the cancellation of excess land allotment. The petitioner had claimed entitlement to land based on an abandoned area of 93 bighas and 16 biswas in India, but the Settlement authorities determined the actual abandoned area was only 43 bighas and 16 biswas. Consequently, the authorities ordered the withdrawal of the excess allotment. The petitioner did not dispute the factual finding regarding the total abandoned area but contended that he should be permitted to choose which specific land allotments should be cancelled to satisfy the reduction, rather than leaving the selection to the Settlement authorities. The Supreme Court reviewed the Settlement Commissioner's order, which had already directed that the cancellation should apply to the latest allotments, excluding areas sold by the petitioner or under stay orders from the Custodian. The Court found no merit in the petitioner's request for a choice in the matter, effectively upholding the Settlement Commissioner's structured approach to cancelling excess allotments based on the chronological sequence of the allotments.
- Does a claimant have the right to choose which specific land allotments are cancelled when an excess allotment is withdrawn by settlement authorities?
- Can settlement authorities direct the cancellation of the latest land allotments to satisfy a reduction in entitlement?
ORDER
1. WAHEEDUDDIN AHMAD, J.-The petitioner abandoned some land in village Phuloowala Dogran, Tehsil and District Karnal, East Punjab. The total area abandoned was shown by the Patwari to be 93 bighas 16 b1swa s in the special jamabandi received from India. This was challenged by respon- -dent No. 3 and the learned Additional Settlement Commissioner and the Settlement Commissioner have held that this figure is wrong because the actual total of the abanboned area is only 43 bighas and 16 biswa s. On this finding, the entitlement of the petitioner, in excess of 43 bighas 16 biswa s, had been ordered to be withdrawn. The petitioner challenged this order in Settlement Revision No. 82 of 1972, and a Division Bench of the Lahore High Court, by order dated the 11th December 1972, dismissed the revision in limine. The petitioner seeks permission to file an appeal against the said order.
2. Ch. Hamidudin, learned counsel for the petitioner, has not challenged the finding of the Land Settlement authorities that the actual total of the abandoned area is only 43 bighas and 16 biswas.
3. His contention is that the petitioner should be given a choice and the matter should not be left to the Settlement authorities to withdraw the area whichever they like. There is a finding to this effect in favour of the petitioner by the Settlement Commis--sioner, but the Settlement Commissioner by order dated the 1st December 1972, observed as under :- "Having regard to all the facts and circumstances of the case, I believe the allotment subsequent to the complete satisfaction of the due claim of Mushtaq should be cancelled excluding the area which was sold by him or which is under a stay from the Custodian. The record of allotment shows that the latest allotments made to Mushtaq were under Khata No. 1070 on 7-2-1968 and Khata No. 1061/1043/331 on 24-4-1968. 12 kanals of land in Khata No. 1061/1043/331 had been sold by Mushtaq.
4. That has to be deducted from this khata. After that the area under Khata No. 1070, the remainder of Khata No. 1061/1043/331 and some other area from some other khata should be cancelled so that the excess allotment equivalent to 50 bighas on the whole is cancelled".
Cited by 2 cases
- MUHAMMAD YOUSAF And Others vs SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER LAND, MULTAN DIVISION, MULTAN And Other 1985 SCMR 1669
- MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN AND Others vs SETTLEMENT AND REHABILITATION 1982 PLD Supreme Court 43