' NADEEM ASHRAF, MEMBER.---This revision petition under section 164 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1967 is directed against the order dated 26.2.2013 of the Commissioner, Rawalpindi Division, whereby the appeal of respondents was accepted, order dated 17.4.2012 of the District Collector, Attock as well as the order dated 15.11.2011 of Naib Tehsildar/Assistant Collector First Grade, Jand were set aside and Ibrar Ahmed, petitioner herein was directed to file fresh applications for partition of joint Khewats No, 2167, 2168 and 1582 of mauza Pind Sultani tehsil Jand district Attock, if so desired by him.
2. Facts of the case briefly are that Ibrar Ahmed, petitioner submitted application to the Naib Tehsildar, Jand having powers of Assistant Collector First Grade, for partition of his share in joint Khewat No, 2167 (58 kanals, 10 marlas) of mauza Pind Sultani Tehsil Jand District Attock. The opponent party applied before the Naib Tehsildar, Jand that the application for partition of only joint Khewat No, 2167 be rejected, as Ibrar Ahmed had not applied for partition of his share in all other joint Khewats. The Naib Tehsildar, Jand by his order dated 15.11.2011 rejected the application.
By his order dated 29.11.2011 he approved the mode of partition of joint Khewat No, 2167 and directed the Girdawar Halqa to prepare and put up Naqsha Jeem. Raheem Dad etc. Filed appeal before the District Collector, Attock who by his order dated 17.4.2012 disposed of the appeal directing the Naib Tehsildar, Jand to continue with the partition of joint Khewat No, 2167. The District Collector, Attock also observed in his order that if the appellants wanted to partition joint Khewats No, 2166 and 2168 they could apply in this behalf and seek remedy under the law. Raheem Dad etc. Filed revision petition before the Commissioner, Rawalpindi Division, who accepted the revision petition by his order dated 26.2.2013 observing and directing as under:- "5. Arguments heard and record perused carefully. It is evident from the record that the petitioners and respondent are co-sharers in Khewat Nos. 2167, 2168 & 1582 located in the revenue estate of Pind Sultani, Tehsil Jand, District Attock. The respondent had applied for partition to the extent of one Khewat only bearing No, 2167 whereas the law requires that the holdings are to be pooled together in such a situation when the partition proceedings are commenced as held by the Board of Revenue in ROR No, 2562 of 1999, decided on 3.10.2002 under sections 135 & 164 of West Pakistan Land Revenue Act, 1967 that 'in my view the dispute between the parties can only be resolved by pooling together the entire joint holdings borne on all the five Khatas and is partitioned among the share-holders in a just, fair and equitable manner'. In such circumstances, the revision petition is accepted without commenting upon the merits or de-merits of the partition proceedings of Khewat No, 2167. The impugned order dated 17.4.2012 passed by the District Collector. Attock as well as order dated 15.11.2011 passed by Naib Tehsildar/Circle Revenue Officer concerned is set aside.
The respondent is directed to file fresh applications for partition of joint land comprising in Khewat Nos. 2167, 2168 & 1582, if so desired by him: The petitioners may also apply for partition of all joint holdings, if so desired by them. The file of this Court be consigned to the record room after fulfilment of codal formalities.
' Hence the present revision petition.
3. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had rightly applied for partition of his share in joint Khewat No, 2167 in accordance with law and that the orders passed by Naib Tehsildar/Assistant Collector First Grade, Jand and the District Collector. Attock did not suffer from any legal infirmity. He prayed that the revision petition may be accepted, the impugned order of the Commissioner, Rawalpindi Division, may be set aside and the orders of the Naib Tehsildar/Assistant Collector First Grade, Jand and the District Collector, Attock may be restored.
4. The learned counsel for the respondents, relying upon order dated 3.10.2002 of Member (Judicial-III), Board of Revenue, Punjab in Muhammad Yasin and another v. Jan Muhammad and 32 others (2005 CLC 1944), contended that in the case of a co-owner having shares in more than one joint holding in the estate, partition of his share out of only one joint holding could not be allowed and that such joint owner should make application for partition of his shares in all the joint holdings. He prayed that the revision petition may be dismissed and the impugned order of the Commissioner, Rawalpindi Division, may be upheld.
5. I have heard the arguments and perused the record. I find force the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner. Each joint Khewat is a separate unit and any joint owner thereof can apply for partition of his share under section 135 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1967. I am afraid that I do not agree with the view of learned Member (Judicial-III), Board of Revenue, Punjab in the case reported as 2005 CLC 1944. The contention of the learned counsel for the respondents is devoid of any legal force. Resultantly the revision petition is accepted, the impugned order of the Commissioner, Rawalpindi Division, is set aside and the order dated 17.4.2012 of the District Collector, Attock as well as the orders dated 15.11.2011 and 29.11.2011 of the Naib Tehsildar/Assistant Collector First Grade, Jand are restored.
6. Order in this case was reserved on the last date of hearing viz 27.11.2014. It should be communicated to the parties through the District Coordination Officer/District Collector, Attock as well as through registered post. 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.