' SYED DEEDAR HUSSAIN SHAH, J.--This appeal by leave of the Court is directed against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 16.9.1997, passed. In Writ Petition No, 4229 of 1983.
2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that Nazir Ahmad (brother of the appellant) filed an application for the exclusion of Sq. No, 19/4, 5/1, 7/2, 8, 13, situated in Chak No, 315/0 R from the reserved Charagah. The said application as rejected by the Assistafit Commissioner/ Collector.
Toba Tek Singh vide order dated 25.8.1981. He challenged the atoresaid order:through an appeal, which was rejected by the Commissioner, Sargodha, vide order dated 16.11.1981. Feeling aggrieved, Nazir Ahmed filed a revision (R.O.R. No, 377/1982) against the aforesaid orders, which was disposed of by the Member (Colonies), Board of Revenue, Punjab, with the following observations vide order dated 3.8.1982.
"4. I have considered the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record of the case as well as the record of the patwari. According to Mutation No, 58, dated 26.11.1971 an area of 43A-oK-18M was resented for Charagah but out of this 8A-7K-15M had already been utilized for School; Graveyards, Five Marlas Housing Scheme and village pond and there remained only 34A-1K-3M for the extension of abadi and other public purpose. Sq. No, 18/15, 16, 24, 25, according to patwari out of the baqaya land is available as it has not been allotted under any permanent scheme. I, therefore, set aside, the impugned order and direct that Sqr. No, 19/4, 5/1, 7/2, 8, 13 under the allotment of the petitioner be excluded from the Charagah and equal area from.
Sqr. No, 18/15, 16, 24, 25 which is more suitable for the extension of abadi, be included in the .
Charagahn and a mutation to this effect be. Sanctioned. The revision petition is thus disposed of."
3. Appellant-Bashir Ahmad filed Review No, 297/ 1982 for review of the above-said order, whereby Sqr. No, 19/4, 5/1, 7/2, 8/13 under the allotment of Nazir Ahmed was excluded from the Charagah, land and Sqr. No 18/15, 16, 24, 25 was included in the Charagah. The said review application was dismissed by the Member (Colonies), Board of Revenue, Punjab, Lahore, vide order dated 14.11.1982.
' The present appellant was allotted Killa Nos. 18/15, 16, 24 & 25 under 5 years Lease Scheme in the year 1972 and then in 1977 and the lease was to expire in 1983. Pursuant to the Government's notification, dated 3.9.1979, the appellant filed an application for the grant of proprietary Tights, which were conferred in respect of the land in question by the Additional Commissioner (Revenue), Faisalabad vide order dated 14.10.1986, but the aforesaid order was recalled by the Additional Commissioner Revenue vide order dated 22.12.1987.
4. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant filed a writ petition against the order dated 3.8.1982 passed by the learned Member (Colonies), Board of Revenue, Punjab, Lahore. The said Constitutional Petition was dismissed by the High Court vide impugned judgment herein.
5. Mr. Muhammad Anwar Sipra, learned ASC for the appellant, inter alia, contended that the appellant was not made a party and was not heard by the learned Member Board of Revenue; that the appellant was entitled for grant of proprietary rights in the light of the Government Notification dated 3.9.1979; that the land belonging to the appellant included , in Charagah was without notice to him, which was done illegally and in violation of principles of natural justice, therefore, appeal may be accepted.
6. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the contentions of the learned counsel for the appellant and submitted that the impugned judgment of the High Court is in accordance with the law, therefore, the appeal may be dismissed with costs.
7. We have considered the contentions of learned counsel for the parties and minutely perused the material available on the record as well as the orders passed by the Revenue, Authorities. In our considered opinion the order, dated 14.11.1982, passed by the Member (Colonies), Board of Revenue Punjab, Lahore is well-reasoned and its operative part reads as under:- "3. I have heard the applicant. He contended that Sqr. No, 18/15, 16, 24, 25 was with him under 5 Years Temporary Lease. Scheme, and his case for the grant of proprietary rights was pending adjudication before the Assistant Commissioner/ Collector Toba Tek Singh and thus this area could not be included in the Charagah. I have perused the impugned order, which indicates that the patwari of the circle had stated that the land in question was not allotted to anyone under any permanent scheme. The copies of record which the applicant has attached with the file show that he was a tender holder and not a lessee and as such he is ineligible for the grant of proprietary rights of this land. The proprietary rights could only be granted to the lessees under the schemes and not to the tender holders. There is thus no ground for the review of the impugned order. The review application is dismissed."
8. Admittedly, the appellant was not a party to the proceedings or the allottee of the land in dispute, therefore, he was not entitled to any hearing before the lower forum. There is no mis- reading, or non-reading of the available material, or misconstruction of law. The impugned judgment of the learned High Court being well-based and unexceptionable hardly warrants any interference by this Court.
9. For the foregoing reasons, this appeal has no merit, which is hereby dismissed with no order as to cost/High Court Upheld. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.