CH. MUHAMMAD TAM), J. --- Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that respondent No. 6/Evacuee Trust Property Board is the owner of suit land measuring 8 kanals, 8 marlas bearing khasra No. 28, property lot No. 76 situated in Mauza Darbar Maligju, District Nankana Sahib who leased out the above-said land to the petitioner about 15 years before. The petitioner is still in cultivating possession who has developed the land and has been regularly paying the lease amount to respondent No. 6 but respondents Nos. 1 to 5 without permission of Evacuee Trust Property Board want to illegally and unlawfully dispossess the petitioner from the suit land.
Therefore, writ petition be allowed and respondents Nos. 1 to. 5 be restrained from dispossessing the petitioner from the suit land.
2. Vide order dated 3.4.2009, this Court directed the respondents to submit report and para-wise comments. In pursuance of said order, respondents No. 6 has submitted his comments which are reproduced as under:- "The brief facts of the case are that as per record Khata No. 76 bearing khasra No. 19 measuring 8 kanals, 18 marlas and No. 28 measuring 8 kanals, 16 marlas total measuring 17 kanals, 16 marlas situated at 31 Maljee, Nankana Sahib is an evacuee trust land which' is under the control of the department of the answering respondent.
The land in question is under the khata dari of petitioner and Asif A.I son of Shahadat A.I jointly. They have paid the lease money to the department upto 2008-09. The area is surrounded by Abadi. The field staff reported that the TMA Nankana Sahib is occupied the land in question by constructing the surrounding wall and converting the area into park.
The D.O. Nankana Sahib being custodian of the land in question intimated the Tehsil Nazim/respondent No. 3 that without prior approval of the department of the answering respondent The construction work at park is illegal and construction work may be stopped (copy of letter is attached as Annex-A). The residents of the area also requested that there is no need of park and construction work of park may be stopped. The Tehsil Nazim, Nankana Sahib did not stop the construction work and requested to District Officer that the construction of TMA may not be disturbed so that the construction of park may be completed (copy of letter is attached as Annex- B). The District Officer being custodian again intimated that without NOC of the department the construction work may not be started (copy of letter is attached as Annex-C). The Tehsil Nazim constructed the surrounding wall about approximately 4 feet without approval/intimation of the department of the answering respondent, which is against the law. The District Officer requested the DPO for providing the police assistance to demolish the illegal construction work on the Trust land. Meanwhile, the khatadar filed the instant writ petition before this Hon'ble Court with the request that respondents may be directed to refrain from dispossessing him from the land in question which is admittedly land of evacuee trust property trust board."
3. Similarly, District Co-ordination Officer, Nankana Sahib/respondent No. 1 has also submitted parawise comments.
4. Learned counsel for respondent No. 6 has frankly conceded that the suit land has been leased out to the petitioner and respondent No. 1 be restrained from constructing the park on the suit land and has fully supported the petitioner.
5. On the other hand, learned Assistant Advocate-General, Punjab has argued the case in the light of parawise comments submitted by respondent No. I.
6. Arguments heard. Record perused.
7. Admittedly, according to the revenue record, _suit land is and its use could not be changed.
Respondents No. 6 has leased out the suit land in violation of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in case A.I Ahmad and others v. Municipal Corporation, Tata Gang and others, reported as 2001 SCM R 585.
8. The status of suit land is in the revenue record. Its use could not be changed which will remain
9. The petitioner's contention that respondents Nos. 1 to 5 be restrained to dispossess him from the suit land and also his lease be renewed which has expired in 2009 is not tenable.
10. The contention of learned Assistant Advocate- General, Punjab that respondent No. I has proposed to construct a public park on the suit land is more near to the law laid down by the Hon`ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in a case reported as A.I Ahmad and others v. Municipal Corporation, Tala Gang and others reported as 2001 SCM R 585 because land reserved for could only be used for welfare purposes of public-at-large.
11. In the light of above discussion, respondent No. 6 is restrained to further lease out the suit land to the petitioner or any 3rd party and the suit land be utilized only for the welfare and benefit of public-at-large such as construction' of a public park, library, school, hospital or for any other similar purpose. Resultantly, the writ petition is without merit, same is dismissed.