' ABDUL SHAKOOR PARACHA, J.-Muhammad Sarwar petitioner herein made an application before the Collector, Sialkot (Now District Narowal) for correction of record of rights regarding land measuring 2 Kanals bearing Khasra No,2125, village Zafarwal, on the ground that earlier this land was owned by a non- Muslim namely Mangal Das son of Gotam Das, which was allotted to Muhammad Ashraf, father of respondents Nos.4 and 5, who subsequently sold the same to Muhammad Hussain, respondent No,6. Since the allotment of the land was without lawful authority, correction in the Revenue Record was claimed. This application was dismissed on 7-9-1992 by the Deputy Commissioner/Collector, Narowal holding that the Khasra number in question having been included in the list of evacuee property and later on allotted to said Ashraf Shah as refugee from Jammu and Kashmir the petitioner should have filed regular appeal or revision against the, order of allotment before the Commissioner. In appeal (No,8 of 1992) it was contended before the Commissioner, Gujranwala Division that the Collector/Deputy Commissioner was bound to implement the order passed by the Custodian, Evacuee Properties, and he has committed illegality by not correcting the Revenue Record. The appeal was dismissed by the Commissioner vide his order dated 30-5-1994 on the ground that previous Khasra No, 1075 having been validly allotted to Ashraf Shah as Jammu and Kashmir refugee before the settlement and consolidation operation in the estate. The validity of the order of the Commissioner was further assailed by the petitioner by filing R.O.R. No,2227 of 1994 before the Board of Revenue Lahore. The same was also dismissed on 20-4-1998.
2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that respondents Nos.l to 3 have acted without lawful, authority in passing the impugned orders and they were bound to correct the Revenue Record according to the orders passed by the Custodian, Evacuee Properties, Lahore dated 10-9-1962. According to the learned counsel principle of law enunciated by the Supreme Court in the judgment reported as Zafarullah Khan v. Custodian of Evacuee Properties (PLD 1964 SC 865 at P.874), is fully applicable and has not been followed by respondents Nos.l to 3. Further contends that it was the duty of the Revenue Authorities to implement the decision of the custodian regarding evacuee or non-evacuee character and status of the properties and person, particularly when the order of the Additional Custodian based on full consideration of evidence suffered from no illegality.
3. Report and parawise comments were called from respondent No, 1 by this Court vide order dated 16-10-1998, and the said respondent has filed report and comments.
4. The petitioner has based his claim for correction of the Revenue Record on an order of the Additional Custodian, Evacuee Property, Lahore, passed in case No,95 of 1962. This application was regarding land measuring 18 Kanals, 14 Marlas in Khata No,253/1133-1134, Khasra Nos. 1077, 1071, 1072, 1073, 1074, 1082 according to Jamabandi of 1956-57 in village Zafarwal, Narowal. This order has been passed by Wali Muhammad Khan Naghar, Additional Custodian, Evacuee Property, Lahore on 10-9-1962 on the basis of copy of Jamabandi for the year 1956-57 (Exh.P.l), copy of mutation No,2257 (Exh.P.2), list of owners (Exh.P.3), copy of death entry of Mangal Das (Exh.P.4), copy of Jamabandi of 1892-93 Exh.P.5 and copy of Jamabndi Of 11865 (Exh.P.6). Disputed Khasra No, 1075, the correction of which was sought by the petitioner, is not included in the application by Muhammad Akbar in which the order dated 10-9-1962 has been passed by the custodian. The order dated 10-9-1962, which is Annex-A at page 15 of the file, does not bear the signatures of Wali Muhammad Khan Naghar, Additional Custodian. This document is not a public documents within the meaning of Article 89 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984. The said document has to be proved by producing original for inspection of the Court or its record. Whether Mangal Das (Original owner of the land in question) died in Pakistan in 1947 is a question of ruled:- ' "...Any person declared to be nonevacuee-Property shown to belong to him is non-evacuee property although custodian's order re silent as to description of such property."
' But, to my mind, in this case the order of the Additional Custodian dated 10-9-1962 cannot be safely relied for the purpose of declaring Mangal Das as non evacuee and his property is non- evacuee property. The property has been treated as evacuee available for transfer, which was transferred by the Rehabilitation Department under the provisions of the Land Settlement Act in favour of Muhammad Ashraf predecessor of respondents Nos.4 and 5, who further sold it to Muzammal Hussain respondent No,6. Whether the land was legally available for transfer to Muhammad Ashraf, who further sold it to Muzammal Hussain who had the knowledge of the defective, title, and purchased the same being a bona fide purchaser with consideration without notice, is another question which is to be decided through elaborate inquiry by the competent Court of law. In this view of the matter, the proper and appropriate remedy for the petitioner is to approach the Civil Court by filing a civil suit.
' Resultantly, this writ petition fails which is dismissed.