' TARIQ SHAMIM, J.---The brief facts of the case are that in the year 1988, the Housing and Physical Planning Department acquired the land measuring 160 Kanals and 13 Marlas owned by the petitioner situated at Okara Road, Depalpur City. In the award its total price was assessed as Rs,34,26,781 and after deducting Rs, 66,866, the assessed value of two Kanals on which Dera of the petitioner was constructed the amount of Rs,33,59,815 was paid to the petitioner. The claim of the petitioner is that the possession of the two Kanals of land for which he had not been paid be handed over to him.
2. In the parawise comments submitted by the Director-General, Housing and Town Planning Department, Government of the Punjab, respondent No,2 it is stated that the entire land of the petitioner including the two Kanals on which Dera was constructed was acquired by the department and total compensation of Rs,34,26,781/93 was to be paid to the petitioner, against which he received Rs, 33,59,815/25. The land Acquisition Collector, Multan had awarded Rs,26,000 as cost of structure and Rs,40,966 for two Kanals of land. The said land and structure was included in the approved layout plan of the scheme and plots planned thereon have since been auctioned as per the policy. The petitioner wilfully did not receive the awarded amount in the year 1988 which is still lying with the L.A.C., Multan. It was not indicated in the letters of the Deputy Director Housing and Physical Planning, Sahiwal and the Director of the said Department Multan dated 11-2-1990 and 17-2-1990 respectively referred to by the petitioner that the case of the petitioner for de-notification had been recommended. The petitioner had failed to mention the detailed reports dated 29-4- 1992 and 1-7-1992 of respondents Nos.3 and 2 respectively wherein factual position was reported to the Administrative Department and it was duly mentioned that the two Kanals land and structure thereon could not be adjusted/exempted. The portion of the letter dated 29-4-1992 written by the Director to the Director-General, Housing and Physical Planning Department, Punjab on the subject being relevant is reproduced hereunder:-- "In this connection, your kind attention is invited to this office Memo. No, TP-20/1109, dated 17-2-1991 whereby the matter had already been referred to your office and the decision has not been intimated so far. However, the case was again referred to the Deputy Director, H & PP Division, Sahiwal and the Assistant Director (TP) of this Circle of Superintendence, was also deputed for physical verification/inspection of the site. It has been reported by them that the area in question (whereby the piece of land demanded to be exempted from the scheme) is under use of Mr. Manzar Ali Khan consisting of 2 Katcha rooms, one hand driven fodder cutting machine (Toka Machine) within a Katcha hut, a hand pump and open courtyard. There is no boundary wall and the open yard is being used. The structure is in a very deteriorating condition. A copy of the inspection report of the Assistant Director (TP) along with site-plan of the area, is enclosed for kind perusal.
' Besides, the Land Acquisition Collector of this Circle has already made the award of compensation amounting to Rs,26,000 for the said structure which has not yet been taken by the said land owner along with land compensation of 2 Kanals land amounting to Rs,40,966/68 where this Katcha structure is existing, as he is interested for the exemption of the area from the scheme.
As per approved plan of the scheme, the developed plots of one Kanal for residential purpose, are provided there and necessary development like sewerage, water supply, roads, has already been carried out.
' In view of this position and the site condition as reported by the Assistant Director (TP) of this office, the undersigned is not in favour of adjustment of structure which is Katcha one and its compensation amounting to Rs,26,000 has already been awarded. The area of 2 Kanals has been mutated in the name of H & PP Department as reported by the Land Acquisition Collector of this office. Therefore, the same cannot be excluded/exempted from the scheme at this stage."
' Subsequently, vide letter dated 1-7-1992, the Director-General communicated the factual position to the Secretary to Government of the Punjab, Housing, Physical and Environmental Planning Department and reiterated that land in question cannot be excluded/ exempted.
3. From the foregoing discussion it is manifest that the entire land of the petitioner including the two Kanals and structure thereon was acquired by the department in accordance with law and the prevailing market price was deposited by the Department with L.A.C., Multan as otherwise the petitioner would not have accepted and received Rs,33,59,815/25 from the compensation pool. The petitioner after lapse of 19 years is seeking implementation of the order of the Chief Minister dated 4-7-1991 whereby it was desired that the constructed house of the applicant be exempted from ADS, Depalpur as per policy. From the paras reproduced herein above it is evident that there was no house constructed on the land. The department had clarified in so many words as to why the request of the petitioner could not be entertained. The award announced by the Land Acquisition Collector included the entire 164 Kanals and 13 Marlas of the petitioner's land inclusive of the two Kanals and Dera constructed thereupon, the entire compensation except Rs, 66,966 was received by the petitioner and the amount is still lying with L.A.C., Multan. The land has since been auctioned as per the policy in the years 2000 and 2002 which situation is irreversible as the land in question cannot be retrieved at this stage. The Competent Authority had communicated the factual position 19 years ago and apparently the petitioner had been sleeping over the matter till 2007. The petitioner did not deliberately receive the entire awarded amount and filed an application for adjustment/denotification which was not acceded to by the Competent Authority.
' For what has been discussed above, there is no merit in this petition which is A accordingly dismissed.