Chaudhry Muhammad Taj, J.--This appeal has been filed against the order passed by the High Court on 28.6.2004 in an application filed under Section 45 of the AJK Interim Constitution Act, 1974.
2. The facts are that Respondents Nos, 1 to 6 filed a writ petition in the High Court with the following prayer: "It is therefore, humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue writ of mandamus directing the non-petitioners, to hand over the possession of the said land to the petitioners, to pay the rent of the said property to the petitioners for the period they have been occupying the said property, to demolish the buildings illegally constructed on the said land and alternatively the Non-petitioners may kindly be directed to pay the compensation according to the market value of land at present with liquidated damages for the last 41 years. Any other relief admissible under law may kindly also be granted to the petitioners."
3. The writ petition was accepted by the learned Chief Justice in the following manner: "In view of above, accepting the petition it is directed that the respondents-Agriculture Department and the Collector Land Acquisition shall acquire the land in dispute in accordance with the provisions of Land Acquisition Act and pay the compensation thereof to the petitioners. The proceedings shall be completed within three months from the date the Secretary Agriculture and Collector Land Acquisition Bhimber receive the copy of the order of this Court. In case of failure to do so, the petitioners shall be entitled to the possession of the land and the construction raised on it by the Agriculture Department being unauthorised as held by Custodian on 25.7.1978 can be removed by them. The petition is accepted with costs. Copy of the order shall be sent to the Secretary Agriculture Azad Jammu and Kashmir and Collector Land Acquisition Bhimber for compliance."
4. The order passed by the High Court was upheld by this Court. Both the learned counsel representing the parties stated before the Court that the land in dispute has been acquired and the compensation has also been determined by the Collector Land Acquisition as per order of the Court against which Respondents Nos, 1 to 6 have also filed a reference challenging the Award before the Reference Judge. However, the learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the appellants, through various orders by the High Court particularly the order under appeal, in a way were directed to make payment of additional or enhanced amount through the application filed for contempt proceedings. The learned counsel also argued that there was hardly any power or jurisdiction resided with the High Court to pass such orders. The learned counsel read out all the order passed in contempt proceedings particularly after passing the Award by the Collector.
5. Mr. Mujahid Hussain Naqvi, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, defended the orders passed by the High Court on the ground that the appellants were not complying with the orders of the Court whereby the writ was accepted, therefore, necessity arose to file the contempt proceedings and thus the orders passed by the High Court were legally warranted.
6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the record. The writ petition was accepted on 9.5.2002. Finally the order was upheld by this Court on 17.10.2002. The acquisition proceedings started on 7.11.2003 and after their completion the Award was announced on 19.6.2004. Respondents Nos, 1 to 6 filed a contempt application against the appellants on 3.9.2003 where the High Court passed an order on 3.12.2003 wherein taking notice of the documents in respect of market value of the land alongwith the rental value were sent to the Collector for consideration and the case was further adjourned. On 26.4.2004 another order was passed whereby the Collector was directed to assess the land value keeping in view the rental value to be included in the final Award and the case was further fixed for 26.5.2004 with a direction to report in this regard. Thereafter, the impugned order was issued when the Award had already been issued. For proper appreciation both the orders dated 3.12.2003 and 26.4.2004 are reproduced: "The learned advocate for the petitioners contended that the department has neither paid the rent of the land to petitioners nor any compensation. He contended that the land in dispute is commercial and adjacent land measuring one kanal is rented at the rate of Rs, 8000/- per month.
He has placed affidavit in this regard. The learned advocate referring to market value of the land adjacent to the land of the petitioners contended that the value of the land is more than one lac rupees per marla. The above referred matter pertains to Collector Land Acquisition for assessing the market value of the land and Collector is also competent to award the rent of the land for period for which it was brought under use of respondents. All the documents shall be sent to the Collector Land Acquisition Bhimber who alone is competent to take into consideration the documents while fixing the market value of the land and rent for use of the land. The case shall come up for arguments on point of contempt on 23.12.2003."
"A cheque amounting to Rs, 19,56,840/- in the name of Collector Land Acquisition District Bhimber for payment to petitioner is produced in the Court. The cheque shall be sent to Collector Land Acquisition Bhimber. A-photocopy of another cheque amounting to Rs, 3,43,160/- issued for payment to petitioner is also placed before the Court.
According to the report of the Collector an amount of Rs, 23,00,000/- with 15% solatium is assessed as market value of the land in dispute by the Collector Land Acquisition and above stated amount's cheque is placed before the Court for payment to petitioner.
An application is filed on behalf of the petitioner stating that the Collector has not assessed rent of the land for the period it remained in the use of the respondents. He has placed on record certain documents showing the rental value of the land adjacent to the disputed land. As the Collector Land Acquisition has not passed award he shall take into consideration the rental value of the land and assess its rental value of the period it remained in the use of the department, for payment to the petitioner which shall be included in the final award. Documents attached with the application alongwith the letter of Director General Agriculture for further action. He is directed to expedite the matter and report in the Court on 26.5.2004."
7. A perusal of the orders passed by the High Court particularly the order dated 28.6.2004, which was recorded after the announcement of the Award, shows that Respondents Nos, 1 to 6 through their application and various orders by the High Court tried to press upon the Collector Land Acquisition to make payment of the acquired land and also to include the rental amount for a period of nearly forty years in the Award. We are afraid we cannot agree to it. It was not the jurisdiction of the High Court to make such orders which may influence the Collector Land Acquisition. The purpose of filing application for contempt proceedings and the orders passed thereon clearly supported the contentions of the learned counsel for the appellants. The Court could proceed with the application if the order passed by the High Court was not complied with but had no legal authority to ask the Collector or other representatives of the department or the Government including the Collector Land Acquisition to move in a particular direction. It is noticed that the question of rent of the land was not a part of the direction originally issued by the High Court which was raised during the contempt proceedings and the documents were sent to the Collector Land Acquisition for consideration.
8. In view of the fact that the respondents have also filed a reference against the compensation and the Government has also challenged the Award, we do not want to make any comment lest it may prejudice case of the either party. We feel that the contempt proceedings are not only un- warranted but certainly give unpleasant effect apart from the fact that the order impugned herein after passing of Award is also without any lawful justification. Therefore, while accepting the appeal the contempt proceedings alongwith all orders including the one impugned herein are quashed.