' This revision petition has been filed against the order dated 26-11-1979 of Commissioner, Multan by which he upheld, in appeal, the order dated 1-4-1979 of Assistant Commissioner/Collector, Khanewal imposing a penalty of Rs, 2,000 on petitioners 1 to 3 each and Rs, 500 on petitioner No, 4.
2. Briefly, the petitioners were found in illicit possession of State land in Chak No, 113/10-R. The petitioners Nos. 1 to 3 occupied 2 kanals each while petitioner No, 4 usurped 10 marlas. The Assistant Commissioner/ Collector, therefore imposed a penalty of Rs, 2,000 on petitioners Nos. 1 to 3 each and Rs, 500 on petitioner No, 4, vide order dated 1-4-1979. The petitioners filed an appeal before the Commissioner on the ground that they were entitled to retain the land in dispute under 5 marlas scheme. The Commissioner rejected the appeal on 26-11-1979 with the following observations :- "A perusal of the record shows that most of the appellants are land owners and so they are not entitled for the allotment of the State land under 5 marlas Scheme. It is also evident that they are in possession of more than 5 marlas and one of them, i,e, Muhammad Ashraf appellant No, 9 has also installed a flour mill and saw machine without any permission which is height of the highhandedness and cannot be allowed to go unchecked. They have also not been able to produce any document to show that they were allotted the State land in dispute under 5 marlas Scheme."
' Hence this revision petition.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners at length and have also gone through the impugned order and the relevant record. Admittedly the land in dispute is agricultural and could not be occupied for residential purposes unless a proper housing scheme was prepared by the Collector in terms of section 4 of the Punjab Housing Facilities for Non-Proprietors in Rural Areas Act, 1975 (Punjab Act No, V of 1975). Nonetheless, I find that while proceeding against the petitioners, the Collector has failed to follow the correct provisions of law. Any encroachment only State land for residential purpose can be dealt with either under section 321 of the Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act, 1912 by resuming possession of the land alongwith any constructions thereon or under section 33(b) (d) read with section 34(iii) by causing any illegal construction or other encroachment to be demolished or removed at the cost of the encroacher. But no penalty or fine can be imposed for such encroachment. A penalty is imposable only in such cases where the encroachers have used any State land for cultivation and have removed the crops grown thereto before they are confiscated in accordance with the provisions of section 34(i). In the instant case the Collector had proceeded straightway to impose a penalty on the petitioners for their illegal occupation of the land for residential purposes, which was not warranted by law. In these circumstances it is Lot possible to allow the impugned orders to subsist. Consequently I would allow this revision petition, set aside the impugned orders and remand the case to the Collector for taking ejectment proceedings against the petitioners in accordance with law.