' ABDUS SATTAR ASGHAR, J.---Petitioner has invoked the constitutional jurisdiction of this Court under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973 to impugn the order dated 20-8-2010 passed by District Officer (Revenue)/District Collector Sargodha, order dated 31-8-2010 passed by Revenue Officer Halqa Bhagtanwala District Sargodha and order dated 7-3-2011 passed by Executive District Officer (Revenue) Sargodha.
2. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that Muhammad Arshad petitioner No,2 obtained vacant plot measuring 20 x 15 feet on rent from Mushtaq Ahmad Chairman Bhagtanwala RIDP at the rate of Rs,1500 per month as rent and also paid Rs,10,000 as security vide rent deed dated 1-7-2005 for a period of one year up-till 30-6-2006 also renewable; that Muhammad Anwar petitioner No,1 also obtained a shop situated at Cooperative Farm Service Centre Bhagtanwala Tehsil and District Sargodha on rent at the rate of Rs,2650 per month for a period of one year from 1-7-2010 to 30-6-2011 vide rent deed dated 26-7-2010 executed by the Administrator Cooperative Farm Service Centre Bhagtanwala; that on 31-8-2010 Revenue Officer Halqa Bhagtanwala ejected the petitioners from the rented premises on the basis of Order No,2494 dated 20-6-2010 passed by District Officer (Revenue) Sargodha and on verbal direction of DO(R) Sargodha dated 31-8-2010; that being aggrieved of the impugned order and ejectment proceedings the petitioner lodged an appeal under section 161 of the Land Revenue Act, 1967 read with section 7 of the Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act, 1912 before the Executive District Officer (Revenue) Sargodha which was also dismissed vide impugned order dated 7-3-2011; that the impugned orders are against law and facts, without providing opportunity of hearing, without lawful authority, against the principles of natural justice and liable to set aside.
3. Respondents Nos.1 to 3 in their para wise comments contended that possession of the State land comprising Killa Nos.3/2, 4, 7, 8/1 measuring 20 Kanals 5 Marlas situated in Chak No,23-A/SB was given to the Project Manager, IRDP Bhagtanwala vide rapt Roznamcha Waqiati No,317 dated 1-5- 1975 for constructing of workshop/godown and office of Markaz Farmer Cooperative Association Bhagtanwala in anticipation of sanction of the Board of Revenue, Punjab Lahore; that on account of misuse of State land however possession was resumed by the then Deputy Commissioner Sargodha vide letter No, 1296/CA/CC dated 22-2-1983; that petitioners in connivance with Muhammad Aslam and Mushtaq Ahmad visited the office of respondent No,4 and started construction of the shops on State land without lawful authority; that on having knowledge of the fact through press and public complaints the District Collector/respondent No,1 ordered ejectment proceedings under sections 32 and 34 of the Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act, 1912 against the petitioners vide order dated 20-8-2010 and thereafter 17 illegally constructed shops were sealed and their possession was resumed in favour of the Government by respondent No, 3 on 22-8-2010 however two shops were sealed on 31-8-2010 in continuation of the earlier order dated 20-8-2010; that the Revenue Officer in his order dated 31-8-2010 incorrectly referred the order No,2494 dated 20-6-2010 due to clerical mistake; that petitioners' appeal before the competent authority has been dismissed; that IRDP has no authority to lease out the State land without approval of the Board of Revenue Punjab Lahore; that petitioners could have filed a revision petition against the impugned order before the Board of Revenue Punjab in terms of section 164 of the Land Revenue Act, 1967; that petitioners have failed to avail the efficacious remedy therefore constitutional petition is not maintainable.
4. Arguments heard. Record perused.
5. At the outset it may be expedient to reproduce the order dated 20-8-2010 passed by the District Officer (Revenue) Sargodha which reads below:-- "ORDER: Whereas the State land/property described below has been illegally encroached upon by the I.R.D.P. Bhagtanwala Tehsil and District Sargodha on which they have no right/title whatsoever:- DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY: Unauthorized possession on State land measuring 9 kanals comprising Sq. No,33 Killa Nos.3/2/1, 4/1 in the Northern side situated in Chak No,23-A/SB Bhagtanwala, Tehsil and District Sargodha by constructing shops.
2. Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred upon the under the Colonization of Government (Lands) Punjab Act, 1912, I, Mian Adil lqbal, District Officer (Revenue)/Distric Collector, Sargodha do hereby order and direct under sections 32 and 34 of the said Act that illegal occupants should be ejected forthwith and the State property got vacated. The Tehsildar Sargodha is authorized to carry out these orders and he may obtain necessary police help to ensure the ejectment proceedings are carried out in peaceful manner.
' Given under my hand and the seal of the court, this 20th day of August 2010.
Sd/- District Officer (Revenue)/ District Collector, Sargodha.
' No,2294/DDO(C)/HVC dated 20-8-2010
1. District Police Officer, Sargodha with the request that as a breach of peace is apprehended at the hands of the illegal occupants, necessary police help may kindly he rendered to the revenue staff as and when required.
2. Tehsildar Sargodha for information and immediate compliance. Compliance report should be sent to this office immediately Sd/- District Officer (Revenue)/ District Collector, Sargodha."
' Simultaneously ejectment proceedings order dated 31-8-2010 passed by the Revenue Officer Halqa Bhagtanwala District Sargodha reads as under:- {{URDU TEXT}}
6. On query of the Court Mr. Tariq Mehmood District Collector Sargodha in attendance has frankly admitted that no order bearing No,2494 dated 20-6-2010 was ever passed by the District Officer (Revenue) Sargodha nor any such order is available on the record of the said office which is made basis to initiate ejectment proceedings dated 31-8-2010 by the Revenue Officer Halqa Bhagtanwala District Sargodha besides oral instructions dated 31-8-2010 passed by the District Officer (Revenue) Sargodha. It is therefore obvious that in the absence of any order No,2494 dated 20-6-2010 the impugned ejectment proceedings were without lawful authority and of no legal effect. It is evident on the record that petitioners were in occupation of shops on the basis of rent agreements executed by the Administrator Cooperative Farm Services Centre Bhagtanwala and the Chairman Bhagtanwala IRDP therefore petitioners were entitled to a show cause notice as well as opportunity of hearing before taking any action adverse to their rights on the basis of rent agreements. Respondents' contention that IRDP Authorities were not authorized to lease out the State land, does not furnish any basis to deny the petitioners' right of due process and fair trial guaranteed under Article 10-A of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. Besides above, careful reading of the impugned order dated 20-8-2010 also makes it crystal clear that it was passed in absence of the petitioners. It fails to reflect any notice or opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. Both the orders are therefore untenable in the eye of law. It is sad to notice that even the Executive District Officer (Revenue) Sargodha while dismissing the petitioners' appeal through the impugned order dated 7-3-2011 failed to notice that petitioners have been condemned unheard and violative to their fundamental right of due process and fair trial in terms of Article 10-A of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. The impugned order dated 7-3-2011 passed by the Executive District Officer (Revenue) Sargodha being against law and facts and without lawful authority is also untenable and liable to set aside.
7. It may be expedient to reproduce the provisions of sections 32 and 34 of the Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act, 1912 which read below:--
32. Power of re-entry in case of squatters and trespassers: When the Collector is satisfied that any person has taken or is in possession of land in a colony to which he has no right or title, the Collector may, in addition to any other powers he may possess, forthwith re-entry upon the land and resume possession of it and take possession of all crops, trees and buildings thereon on behalf of Government without payment of compensation whatsoever."
34, Additional power of Collector in regard to offences: When the Collector is satisfied that an act punishable under section 33 has been committed, he may in lieu of proceeding against the offender under that section or after conviction of the offender under that section--
(i) in the case of an offence under section 33(a), confiscate the crops growing on any land cultivated in contravention of this Act or, if the crops have been cut, recover such sum as he may assess as the value thereof from the offender.
(ii) in the case of an offence under section 33(c), recover such sum as he may assess as the value of the trees or tree destroyed.
(iii) in the case of an offence under section 33(b), (d) or (e), cause the building or other encroachment to be demolished or removed or the excavation or channels to be filled up and levy the costs of so doing from the person responsible for such act."
8. The expression when the Collector is satisfied' used in both the afore-quoted provisions is of great importance. It requires a probe into the matter in accordance with the principle of natural justice. An order passed without notice and without providing opportunity of hearing is void and no sanction can be attached to the superstructure based on it. The impugned orders passed violative to petitioners' fundamental right of due process and fair trial in terms of Article 10-A of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 are therefore amenable through invoking constitutional jurisdiction of this Court under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973.
9. For the above reasons this writ petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 20-8-2010 passed by the District Officer (Revenue) Sargodha, order dated 31-8-2010 passed by the Revenue Officer Halqa Bhagtanwala District Sargodha and order dated 7-3-2011 passed by the Executive Officer (Revenue) Sargodha are set aside to the extent of the petitioners and the case is remanded to the District Officer (Revenue) Sargodha to decide the matter afresh strictly in accordance with 'law after providing opportunity of hearing to both the petitioners keeping in view the requirements of Article 10-A of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973.