' ABDUL HAFEEZ MEMON, J.-This petition is directed against the order dated 17-8-1976, passed by the Member, Federal Land Commission Islamabad, whereby he set aside the orders dated 23-6-1972 and 18-7-1974, passed by the Land Commissioner, Sind and declared the gift alienations made by the petitioner No. 1 to his wife, two sons and three daughters, petitioners 2 to 7 herein, as invalid and ordered resumption of the land involved therein.
' The relevant facts are that petitioner No. 1 Group Captain (Retd.) Shafi Ahmed, a member of Armed Forces, had opted and purchased 420-17 acres of agricultural land, situated in deh Detha, taluka Naushahro Feroze, District Nawabshah, under the Scheme framed under M. L. R. 89/91, As the petitioner No. 1 wanted to gift some of the above land to his wife, two sons and three daughters, he made an application to the Deputy Commissioner/Additional Settlement Commissioner (Land), Nawabshah, sometime in the month of January, 1970, requesting for permission to gift 247-33 acres to his aforesaid heirs. The Deputy Commissioner considered the application with reference to the clarification, bearing No, 5063/69/215 GMB (Wed 10-2-1970, issued by the Board of Revenue, West Pakistan and granted the permission by his order dated 24-11-1910. Petitioner No. 1 thereafter made the gifts which were recorded and necessary mutation was sanctioned and made in the revenue record on 1-4-1971. Thereafter, on the promulgation of M. L. R. 115, petitioner No. 1 filed his declaration wherein he disclosed his holding of land and the aforesaid gift alienations made by him. The declaration came up for scrutiny before the Land Commissioner, Sind, who, by his order, dated 23- 6-1972, declared the said gift alienations to be in order and valid under paragraph 7 of the M. L. R.
115. Thereafter, it having been reported to the Land Commissioner that the gift alienations were made in breach of the law, the Land Commissioner, Sind, re-examined the matter in exercise of his suo motu revisional powers under the Land Reforms Rules, 1972, and after hearing the parties and considering the relevant papers held that in view of the copy of the order dated 28-11-1970 passed by the Deputy Commissioner/Additional Settlement Commissioner (Land), Nawabshah, showing that the aforesaid gift alienations were made by petitioner No. 1 declarant after obtaining required, permission from the Deputy Commissioner, the alienations were made in accordance with law and, by his order, dated 18-7-1974, maintained his earlier order dated 23-6-1972. Thereafter, the case of the petitioner No. 1 was once again reopened by the Member, Federal Land Commission in exercise of his suo motu powers under paragraph 29 of M. L. R. 115, and he, relying solely on the Circular Letter No, SLC-7861/72/4525 dated 10.12-1974, set aside the order passed by the Land Commissioner, Sind, and declared the gift alienations in question as void by his order, dated, 17-8- 1976. Hence this petition.
' Mr. Imam Ali Kazi, the learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that the aforesaid circular relied upon by the learned Member was applicable only to those cases wherein the land re- purchased under M. L. R. 89/91 had been alienated by the purchaser by way of gift without obtaining the required permission from the Deputy Commissioner under paragraph 10 of the Scheme framed under the aforesaid Regulation; but inasmuch as the gift alienations in question were made by the petitioner No. 1 after obtaining the said permission from the Deputy Commissioner, Nawabshah, vide latter's order dated 24-11-1970, the said circular was not applicable in the instant case and was misconceived by the learned Member, Federal Land Commission who thus acted contrary to law in holding the gifts as invalid by setting aside the validation orders duly passed by the Land Commissioner, Sind, in rightful exercise of his jurisdiction under the Regulation.
' The contention of the learned counsel is well-founded. Perusal of the impugned order passed by the learned Member, Land Commission would indeed show that he declared the gift alienations in question as void by relying solely on the abovesaid circular letter issued by the Sind Land Commission which reads as under:- "Sub. : Permission of alienations to the allottees of land under M. L. R. 89/91.
' The matter respecting transfer of land acquired under M. L. R. 89/91, was taken up with the Federal Land Commission.
2. The decision of the Federal Land Commission taken in this regard is conveyed vide their Letter No, F-7(4) dated 20th August, 1973, is reproduced below:- "In case of sale or sale agreement, where the prior permission of the Collector was not obtained, all such transactions are to be reopened, and thoroughly scrutinised by the Land Commissioner and if they are found to be genuine, they may be confirmed in spite of the fact, that the permission of the Collector was not obtained. However, gifts made by the grantees of land under M. L. R. 89/91 should be treated as void and all such lands should be resumed immediately and a compliance report sent to the Federal Land Commission.
3. Sind Land Commissioner has been pleased to decide that the above order of the Federal Land Commission should be complied with."
' Plain faithful reading of the above circular would, indeed, show that it pertains to the land surrendered and re-purchased under M. L. R. 89/91 and later alienated by sale, agreement of sale of gift without obtaining prior permission of the Deputy Commissioner as required under paragraph 10 of the Scheme framed under M. L. R. 89/91 and provides that in cases of sales or agreements of sale made in respect of such land without obtaining the aforesaid permission from the Deputy Commissioner the same may be confirmed if found to be genuine, but in cases of gifts made of such land without obtaining the said permission from the Deputy Commissioner, it does not permit similar confirmation and renders all such gifts as void, even if the same be found to have been genuinely made. Thus, the quintessence of the pro\ 'stems in the circular regarding gifts is that they render void only such gifts as had been without obtaining prior permission from the Deputy Commissioner required under paragraph 10 of the Scheme framed under the aforesaid Regulation. Indeed, Mr. Muhammad Ibrahim Memon, learned Additional Advocate-General appearing for the Federal Land Commission also could not dispute the above interpretation of the Circular, for, if it were interpreted otherwise to mean that it simply rendered all gifts of such land as void, as appears to have been assumed by the learned Member, Federal Land Commission, then it would render void not only such gifts as were made by the alienors after obtaining the required permission from the Deputy Commissioner under paragraph 10, but also those made after payment of all the instalments of the purchase price of land and becoming full owner of the land, which interpretation, however, cannot be permitted, as it will be in clear violation of the Circular itself read with clarification No, 506369/215 GMB III. Board of Revenue, West Pakistan, Lahore dated the 10th February, 1970, and paragraph 7 of the M, L. R. 115 which permits validation of gifts made by the donors to their specified heirs within the specified period, as in the instant case.
' That being so, factum of making the gift not being disputed and it being an admitted position that the gifts in question were made by the petitioner No. 1 to his abovesaid specified heirs after duly obtaining prior permission from the Deputy Commissioner under the paragraph 10 vide Tatter's order, dated 24-11-1970, the Circular in question was indeed, not applicable to the gift alienations in question. Thus the Member, Federal Land Commission had, indeed, wholly misconceived the circular and acted without lawful authority in declaring the gift alienations as void by relying on the said circular and setting aside the orders validly passed by the Land Commissioner, Sind, holding the gifts to be in order and valid.
' For the aforesaid reasons, we allow this petition, declare the impugned order to have been passed by the Member, Federal Land Commission without lawful authority and quash it. As a consequence, the orders passed by the Land Commissioner, Sind will stand restored. In the circumstances of the case, we make no order as to costs,