' MUSHIR ALAM, J.---Petitioner has impugned the notification dated 23-2-2005 under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, inviting objections as to acquisition of Petitioner's land. Main thrust of the arguments of the learned counsel for the Petitioner appears to be that the ,Petitioner is the owner of the subject property, right was perfected pursuant to the orders passed in legal proceeding in Suit No,1201 of 1998.
2. It is stated that earlier attempt of the Respondents Nos. 8 and 9 to acquire the private property of the Petitioner was successfully defeated in Suit No,1201 of 1998. Claim of the Petitioner was sustained in H.C.A. No,88 of 2001, copy of the judgment is available at page 291.
3. It is urged by the learned counsel that, after being unsuccessful in attaining their designs to deprive the Petitioner from the subject property, Respondents Nos.8 and 9 have used armed forces as a cloak and conduit to deprive the petitioner of his property. According to him, impugned notification is motivated aimed at personal aggrandizement of officers of N.L.C. It is urged that, in terms of the notification, where under N.L.C. Was established, it is clearly specified that the N.L.C.
Could acquire the land through specified mode namely rent, purchase or lease, as reflected in the orders of the Court available at page 207 at page 221. It is stated that the land is being acquired in a dubious manner as no notice was issued to the Petitioner, impugned notification was got published in a surreptitious manner in gazette. According to the learned counsel such clandestine mode of acquiring the property is violative and prejudicial to the fundamental rights to property guaranteed in terms of Article 24 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. It was urged that, rights as guaranteed under the constitution are jealously guarded by the Court. It is further urged that sufficient land in the vicinity and area around the Petitioner's land is available and resting with Provincial Government, which could have been easily acquired. It is urged that some of the officers of the N.L.C. Have made it a matter of ego, and at all cost want to deprive the Petitioner of his land. In support of his contention he has placed reliance on a case reported as Abdul Ghani and another v. Province of Balochistan and 2 others (PLD 1992 Quetta 63), the Court did not approve the land acquisition proceedings without service of Notice on the person affected.
In the another case reported as Mst. Surayya Aziz v. Collector, Lahore District, Lahore and 2 others (2003 CLC 1510), when the acquisition of land under M.L.O. Was successfully defeated, subsequent resort to acquire land under the Land Acquisition Act, was held to be motivated under the garb of public interest.
4. Dr. Farough, further points out that the limitation of 30 days to file objection had long lapsed as the Petitioner was not served any notice nor was aware of the impugned notification.
5. Mr. Saalim Salam Ansari, learned counsel appearing for the Respondents Nos.8 and 9 contended that no personal notice on the petitioner is required, the notification has been issued in the due compliance of section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act. When the attention of the learned counsel was drawn to section 45 Land Acquisition Act, he conceded that no personal notice was served. He however, without contesting the matter further, on instructions submits that the Petitioner may file his objection within 30 days from today and controversy as to vires of notification and mala fide could be raised and examined by the authority under the Land Acquisition Act.
6. Mr. Manzoor Ahmed learned counsel for CDGK is also of the similar view.
7. Right to property is valuable right guaranteed under Articles 23 and 24 of the Constitution of Pakistan. No person could be deprived of his property save in accordance with law. Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is one of such law under which a person could be deprived of his personal property, provided of course, it is acquired or sought to be acquired "for public purpose" and only in manner as provided therein. Action as to acquisition and or "public purpose" is justifiable.
Publication of the Notification in the official gazettes, though sine qua non for assumption of jurisdiction under the Land Acquisition Act, it is first step towards acquisition. Purpose of publication of gazette Notification is to inform person affected and the public at large for the proposed acquisition of land for public purpose. It is now a settled principle of law that no person could be condemned unheard, and no person could be divested of property without due course of law, principles of natural justice is deemed to be imbedded and enshrined in every statute, unless expressly excluded. Where the recorded owner of the land, proposed to be acquired, is ascertained and is known, then notice to such person is necessary, publication of Notification in official Gazette meets only the extrinsic and not the intrinsic requirement of law. It is common knowledge that publication and circulation of official Gazette is but limited and usually confined to meet the statutory requirement of law. It has come to notice that, at times not many persons are aware of the important and valuable information that a Gazette Notification tends' to communicate and dispense. Limited access and circulation of official Gazette notification at times defeat the principle of natural justice and frustrate the very object of law. In order to comply with the requirement of principle of natural justice, at the time of publication and issuance of Notification under section 4 and or 6 ibid notice under section 45 of the Land Acquisition Act may also be served on the recorded owners or on the affected person.
8. Object of Land Acquisition Act, is not to deprive a person from his property-right without due process of law. One of the essential intrinsic requirements of principle of natural justice is to give proper and meaningful opportunity to the affected person to challenge and object to the proposed or likely acquisition of land under the Act of 1894.
9. Since the Respondents have conceded to such right of the Petitioner, we do not deem at necessary to engage ourselves into controversy as raised in the Petition as to vires of impugned Notification; therefore, the Petition is being disposed off in the following terms;
(1) Petitioner shall file his objection to the impugned notification dated 23-2-2005 within 30 days from the date of passing of this order.
(2) Petitioner shall be entitled to challenge the impugned notification and may raise all objections as raised in this petition or any other objections as may be available to him under the law.
(3) The authority concerned shall pass appropriate speaking orders dealing with all objections as may be raised by the Petitioner, after providing opportunity of being heard to the Petitioner, personally or through his counsel/representative strictly in accordance with law.
(4) The authority shall decide the objections preferably not later than 60 days from the date of filing of the objections
(5) Till passing of the order and or final determination of the rights of the Petitioner's subject to appeal, as may be permissible under the law, the Respondents shall not take any coercive action against the Petitioner nor disturb his possession.
(6) Petitioner shall also not create any third party interest nor shall change the complexion of the property till final determination of controversy in land acquisition Act.
' Petition in terms of the above disposed of with no order as to costs.