1. NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.--This petition is directed against the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court dated 27-7-1980 passed in Writ Petition No. 1355 of 1977.
2. The facts which form the background are that the petitioner was allotted about 200 kanals of land comprising Field Nos. 28-1.-25 situated in Chak No. 331/W. B. Tehsil Mailsi, District Multan for a period of ten years in Rabi 1968 under ' the Notification No. 3369/67-1968-Cl, 3 dated 7th February, 1968.
3. Accordingly, the lease was .2o expire ire Rabi, 1978. However, before the expiry of the lease period the Collector, Multan, vide his order dated 21-10-1975 allotted the land to respondents 3-4 under the Islamabad Oustees Scheme. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner filed a time barred appeal before the Additional Commissioner (Revenue). Multan which was accepted by him vide his order dated 7-11-1979. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid order, respondents 3-4 filed a revision petition before the Member (Colonies). Board of Revenue. This was accepted by the Member. Board of Revenue vide order dated 8-2-1979 and the order of the Collector dated 21-10-1975 restored. In the course of his order, it was observed :- The land in dispute was on lease with the respondent for 10 years. According to the instructions contained in 1968 Scheme, ten years leases were to be predetermines if the land was required for public purposes. The petitioners are evictees of Islamabad and their resettlement on State land constituted to be a public purpose. The record shows that the land in question already stood included in theSchedule of Islamabad Oustees when it was leased out to the respondent. It had, therefore, been rightly resumed from the respondent and allotted to the petitioners, The Additional Commissioner had no right to cancel the allotment of the petitioners and restore the land to respondent."
4. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the Member, Board of Revenue the petitioner moved a writ petition in the Lahore High Court (W. P. 1355/79), which was heard by a learned Single Judge of the said Court along with some other writ petitions involving the same ques--tions. All the said writ petitions were disposed of by a common order passed on 27-7-1980. The learned Single Judge found that the petitioner herein was allotted the land in dispute under a temporary scheme and that under the terms and conditions thereof the lease of such a person could be terminated even before the expiry of the lease period, if the land is required for any permanent scheme of or any public purpose. In the instant case, the land was required for a public purpose, namely, resettlement of evictees from Islamabad Qustees Scheme as found by the Member, Board of Revenue. Since resettlement of such persons on State land constituted a public purpose, the land could be rightly resumed for allotment to them.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that although the land granted to the petitioner was under the notification dated 7-2-1968 under which the lease was originally granted for ten years but, subsequently, the lease was extended for a further period of five years by the Notification No. 10993-77/195-CLI dated 7-2-1.978. Thus, the area in dispute could not be resumed from him prior to Rabi 1983. Furthermore, the Government of Punjab in the Colonies Department had in the meanwhile enforced a scheme vide Notification Nos. 3215-790 3)73-C-1I, dated 3rd September, 1979, enabling the lessees to acquire the proprietary rights. The result of the aforesaid notifications was that the land allotted to the petitioner could not have been resumed as he was entitled to the grant of proprietary rights therein and, consequently, the order of the learned Member, Board of Revenue was liable to be set aside in writ jurisdiction. We observe that the same contention was raised before the High Court but was repelled with the following obser--vations :- "I have no doubt in my mind that reading of various letters of the Government issued in this regard is open to only one conclusion that any person to whom the land has been allotted under any temporary lease seheme, can be ejected, if the land is required for allotment under some permanent scheme or for any public purpose. Similarly, question of acquiring proprietary rights in such lands does not arise if the same before the letter dated 3rd September, 1979, has been allotted to any person under permanent scheme or reserved or earmarked to be allotted under some permanent scheme."
6. After some further discussion, the learned Judge also observed :- "Therefore, I am clear in my mind that temporary leases granted to any person can be terminated even before the expiry of the lease period if the land is required for any permanent scheme or for any public purpose. Similarly, a person whose land has already been included in the Schedule for allotment on permanent basis or whose land has been allotted to any other person under permanent scheme, cannot claim the acquisition of proprietary rights on the basis of the letter dated 3rd September, 1979. On the view I have taken I am supported by the judgment of this Court dated 31-3-1976 in Writ Petition No. 414 of 1970."
7. The last-mentioned decision (in W. P. No.414/73) is by one of us (Nasim Hasan Shah, J.) in the High Court and it was, inter alia, observed that "the provisions of paragraphs Nos. 15 and 18 of the Temporary Cultivation Conditions dated 22-9-1944 make it perfectly clear that leases under Temporary Scheme could be terminated earlier than the lease period in certain specified situations. Since the allotments under the Islamabad Oustees Scheme, were allotments in connection with a permanent Scheme, this was a valid ground on which the leases grantedon temporary basis could . Be determined. Hence no objection could be taken to the resumption of the temporary leases for the aforementioned purpose".
8. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the caveators, we are of the view that there is no reason for not accepting the finding of the learned Member, Board of Revenue that the land in question already stood included in the Scheme of Islamabad Oustees when it was leased out to the partners herein. Since the Temporary Cultivation Conditions dated 22-9-1944 have been made applicable to the leases granted under the notification of 7-2-78 we are inclined to agree with the view expressed by the High Court in it, elaborate and detailed judgment that the reliance by the petitioner on the notifications dated 7-2-78 and 3-9-79 was misplaced and the petitioner's lease could, in the circumstances of his case, be resumed on the expiry of the ten years lease period.
9. There is, therefore, no force in this petition which is hereby dismissed.