SYED HAMID ALI SHAH, J. - This R.F.A. No. 141- 2004 and R.F.A. No. 33-2008 having common question of law and facts are being disposed of together.
2. The Land Acquisition Collector, Tehsil Taxila, District Rawalpindi, acquired land of the respondents.
The question' of compensation was referred to the Referee Court by invoking provision of Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. The Referee Court vide judgment and order dated 19.4.2004 (impugned herein) accepted the petition and granted compensation at a rate of Rs. 80,000/- per kanal alongwith 15% compulsory acquisition charges. The order of Referee Court is assailed in this appeal.
3. This appeal has been filed by the Standing Counsel of the Federal Government on behalf of Military Estate Officer, a beneficiary of the acquired land.
4.Learned counsel for the appellant while meeting the objection of other side as to the maintainability of this appeal has contended that in the memo, of the parties, the appellant is Land Acquisition Collector, Tehsil Taxila, District Rawalpindi, He has further submitted that memorandum of appeal has been signed by Military Estate Officer, Rawalpindi Circle due to inadvertence. While referring to the case of Ismail v. Razia Begum (1981 SCM R 687) and Jaj Muhammad v. Muhammad Azam (1998 C.L.C. 787) it is contended that appellant be permitted to amend this petition and correct the memorandum of appeal signed by the Land Acquisition Collector.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent on the Other hand has, submitted that a beneficiary of the acquired land cannot file appeal against the decision of the Referee Court. He has supported his contentions by referring to the cases of B.P. Pakistan Exploration & Production v. Sher Ali Khawaja (PLD 2008 S.C. 400) and Pakistan Military Estate Officer Kharian Cantt. And. Another v. Hayee Khan and another (PLD 1995 S.C. 418).
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and record perused. Military Estate Officer has singed this appeal as appellant and has also affixed his official seal. The Federal counsel has been engaged by him to file this appeal and argue the same. We have perused the record and found that no wakalat Nama signed by the appellant, has been filed. Various applications have been filed, alongwith this appeal and the affidavits in support of these applications were sworn by Military Estate Officer, so much so an application for early hearing tiled in September, 2007 was signed by Military Estate Officer, Rawalpindi. These facts show that appeal was filed under the instruction and on behalf of Military Estate Officer, who being beneficiary of acquired land, cannot assail the judgment of the Referee Court in appeal. Whiie holding so we are fortified by the recent judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan (PLD 2008 S.C. 400) where it was held that:- "Beneficiary of the acquired land has no right and locus standi to either file reference against the award of compensation/appeal against a judgment arising out of the reference under Section 18 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894"
7. The request made by learned counsel for the appellant at this stage, for substituting the appellant cannot be entertained for various reasons. Firstly, the request is made when the period of filing the appeal has already lapsed, secondly no formal application has-been filed in this regard thirdly the request is again made on behalf of Military Estate Officer and lastly Standing counsel cannot represent the Province/Land Acquisition Collector and a valid request on behalf of Land Acquisition Collector can be made by the Advocate-General, Punjab or Additional Advocate- General, Punjab. ; .
8. The upshot of the above discussion is that appeals, which have been filed on behalf of Military Estate Officer, are not Competent and are accordingly dismissed.