' This order will dispose of Writ Petitions Nos. 414 of 1976, 415 of 1976, 416 of 1976 and 417 of 1976. In the last-mentioned case, Mr. Iftikhar Ahmad Dar Advocate has also been heard on behalf of the petitioners therein.
2. The facts of the case have been stated accordingly in the order of the learned Member (Colonies), Board of Revenue, as follows :- "the petitioners were allotted State land in Mauza Rahimshah in 1971 under 15 years lease scheme.
They took possession of the allotted land and started cultivation. In 1975 the Deputy Commissioner reviewed the allotment orders on the ground that the land in dispute stood reserved for allotments to Islamabad oustees and, therefore, could not be allotted to the petitioners under 15 years lease scheme. The petitioners filed appeals before the Additional Commissioner (Rev.), Multan who rejected the appeal on 11th December, 1975."
' They, thereafter, moved the learned Member (C), Board of Revenue, by way of revision who also sustained the orders passed by the two officers below and dismissed the revision petitions, hence the present writ petition.
3. The learned Member (Colonies), Board of Revenue, Punjab, has held in his order that the land was allotted temporarily to the petitioners under 15 years lease scheme and when the land was required for a public purpose or for a permanent scheme, the temporary leases could be determined at any time and the area utilised for purposes of the permanent scheme. Since the provision of law enunciating the above principle was not mentioned in the order of the learned Member, Board of Revenue, a report was called for from him to state the provisions of law on which the above enunciation was based. The report has been received and Syed Altaf Husain Shah Deputy Secretary (Colonies) has also appeared and explained the point of view of the Board of Revenue.
4. In the first instance, he has drawn attention to Notification No, 1622-71/1205/-C. L. I., dated 24th April, 1971 whereby a 15 years lease scheme was promulgated and the preamble to this scheme state as follows :- "This statement of conditions is issued subject to the provisions of Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act, 1912 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and the tenancy or lease granted under these ' conditions shall be a scheduled tenancy under section 10(2) of the Act. Except as otherwise specifically provided for in these conditions, the Temporary Cultivations Conditions published,-vide Notification No, 2664-C, dated 22nd September, 1944 as subsequently amended hitherto shall be applicable to the tenancy or lease granted under these conditions."
5. Paras No, 15 and No, 18 of the last-mentioned conditions are in the following terms :- "15. (a) The tenant on issue by Government of .a notice that the whole or any part of the land is required for permanent allotment Of for reclamation purposes or for any public purpose or for the exercise of mineral rights hereinbefore excepted and reserved shall before a date named in the notice which date shall not be earlier than 30 days from the date of issue of the notice, surrender the whole land or any part thereof referred to in the said notice.
(b) The tenant shall surrender the whole or any part of the land which may be found to have been previously allotted or demised to any other person.
18. The tenant, shall, at the expiry or sooner determination of the tenancy, leave the land and surrender it peaceably to Government, and during the concluding season of the tenancy, shall not sow any crop of the succeeding season but shall permit any person duly authorised by the Collector to cultivate crops on any land on which no crop may be standing."
6. He has also drawn attention to para. No, 2 (d) of the 15 years lease scheme which is in the following terms :- "2. Exceptions.-The following categories of land shall not be leased out under these conditions :-
(d) land which has been reserved for sale, lease or allotment under any approved scheme.
7. Para. No, 7 of this scheme also lays down as follows:- "7. Earlier termination etc. Of lease:-Unless termintated determined or surrendered earlier, the normal duration of the lease under these conditions shall be fifteen years."
8. Para. No, 16 of this scheme runs asunder:- "16. Surrender for public purpose.-(l) Where the land is required for reclamation or for public purpose or for the exercise of mineral rights excepted and reserved by the Government, the lessee on the receipt of a notice issued by the Collector to that effect, shall surrender the whole or any part of such land within one month of the receipt of such notice.
(2) The lessee shall surrender to the Collector the whole or any part of the land which may be found to have been previously allotted, leased or demised to any other person.
9. The provisions quoted above as well as the provisions of paragraphs Nos. 15 and 16 of the Temporary Cultivation Condition dated 22nd September, 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 lease granted on temporary basis could be determined. Hence no objection could be taken to the resumption of the temporary leases for the aforementioned purpose.
10. Mr. Iftikhar Ahmad Dar, Advocate. However, argued that the allotment of the petitioners had been cancelled under the provisions of section 24 of the Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act, and under the aforesaid provisions of law it is only where a tenant has committed a breach of the conditions of his tenancy that the Collector may, after giving him an. Opportunity to appear and state his objection, order the resumption of the tenancy. In this case, there was no allegation of breach of the conditions of the tenancy and, consequently the action taken by the Revenue authorities was not in accordance with law. There is no force in this contention. Section 24 has to be read alongwith section 10(2) of the Act which lays down that the Provincial Government may issue a statement or statement of the conditions on which it is willing to grant land in a colony to tenants. The grant made to the petitioners was in accordance with the 15 years lease scheme and therein conditions existed under which the tenancy could be resumed. Consequently the expression "breach of the conditions of tenancy" in section 24 must be understood to mean that resumption can be ordered only in accordance with the terms of the tenancy and not otherwise. In somewhat similar circumstances this Court has in the case of Karam Din v. Member, Board of Revenue (I) taken the same view.
11. Even otherwise the tenancy in question was a scheduled tenancy and no notice under section 24 was necessary and the lease could have been resumed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the conditions on which the lease was granted.
12. A further submission made by Mr. Iftikhar Ahmad Dar was that the petitioners had made improvements over the land, sunk tube-wells, built their hutments and were entitled to compensation before the resumption was ordered. This aspect of the matter has been taken into consideration in the order of the Collector who has directed that Eligibility Certificate in regard to compensation for permanent structure standing, crops and tube-well should be given to lessees.
The petitioners should apply in that behalf to the Collector.
13, Malik Talib Hussain raised a further point on the basis of Memo. No, 6903-65-P-36 SG II, dated 7th January, 1966 on the subject of resettlement of displaced persons of Islamabad, clarification of distance from the outer limits of Municipal Committees or Mandi and Railway Stations in respect of transfer of State land to Islamabad Oustees. In this memorandum reference was made to the restrictions imposed by the Board of Revenue on the sale of State land within five miles belt of colony sown in the following words "The Board, therefore, agrees with you that State land lying within five miles radius from the outer limits of any town or within one mile of a railway station cannot be sold to the displaced persons of Islamabad."
' He contended that the area in question fell within three to five miles from the outer limits of the town in question and argued that before this area could be considered available for allotment to Islamabad Oustees, it was necessary that it should have been specifically included in the Schedule wherein the area to be allotted to Islamabad Oustees was specified. This had not been done. What was done was that the allotment of the petitioners had been simply cancelled and they were replaced by contestin respondents. This submission does not appear to be correct because the admitted position before all the Revenue Courts was that the area question was included in the Schedule prepared for the benefit of Islamabad Oustees. This is evident from the following observation {{FOOT NOTE}}
(1) PLD 1968 Lail. 328 {{FOOT NOTE}} contained in the orders passed by the officers who have dealt with this case, for instance, in the order passed by the Collector, Multan dated 30th September, 1975, it is observed :- "Even if the allotment is considered regular the land in question was included in the scheme and was required for permanent allotment under the Islamabad Oustees Scheme.
' The scheme mentioned in the above order obviously refers to the scheme prepared for compensating the Islamabad oustees. Similarly in the order of the learned Additional Commissioner (Rev.) dated 11th December, 1975 it is observed as follows :- "The land in question had been placed in the Schedule meant for Islamabad Oustees and it was allotted to them:.
' The learned Member (Colonies), Board of Revenue, has not taken any other decision in the matter.
15. In view of the foregoing discussion, I find no force in these writ petitions, which are dismissed in limine, subject to the observation made with regard to the payment of compensation to the petitioners.