' SHAHID KARIM, J.--- This petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, has the following prayer: - "It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that an appropriate writ order or mandate may be issued to restrain the respondents from making any changes or alteration in the revenue record and to dispossess the petitioners from the land in dispute in violation of the orders of the superior courts and during the pendency of the proceedings before the Board of Revenue in consequence of the order of the Hon'ble High Court dated 21.05.2015."
2. This order shall also decide connected petitions W.Ps. Nos.11117, 11118, 11119 and 11120 of 2015 which involve identical issue.
3. The source from which the instant constitutional petitions have arisen is the order passed on 21.05.2015 in W.P No.4085 of 2006. The petition was disposed of in the following terms:- "4. In view of the above, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, who are duly instructed, it is directed that in case the petitioners have filed a fresh application for renewal of the lease, the same shall be processed by the competent authority, strictly in accordance with law after hearing the petitioner and/ or their representatives/counsel and all other concerned parties on case to case basis through independent application of mind and without being influenced by the order dated 08.08.2006 passed by Member (Colonies), Board of Revenue."
4. The controversy in the instant petitions merely relates to the precise definition of the term 'competent authority' which is tasked to determine the matter as remanded by this Court in W.P No.4085 of 2006. The learned counsel for the petitioners considers the 'competent authority' to be the Member (Colonies) Board of Revenue, Punjab and it is not in dispute that .The matter upon remand by this Court is pending with the Member (Colonies) Board of Revenue, Punjab and in fact, on 2.8.2015, notices were issued to the parties including the District Remount Officer, Sahiwal. That matter is subjudice and the learned counsel for the parties do not take cavil with this fact. It is also not in dispute that the matter has to be dealt with under the provisions of the Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act, 1912 and in terms of section 10(2) of the Act, 1912. The last grant of the lease of the Government land to the petitioners as tenant has been done vide the Statement of Conditions for the grant of State land for animal breeding in the colony area under question was issued on 18.6.1997 for a period of 10 years. That instrument of lease was executed by the petitioners. According to condition No.3, the tenancy was for a fixed period of 10 years from Kharif 1994 to Rabi 2004 and shall be non-renewable. However, that is not the controversy which I intend to resolve through this order. As explicated, the real controversy is as to the identity of the competent authority which has to adjudicate upon the matter upon remand by this Court.
5. The matter has been rendered complicated by the issuance of certain documents on the part of District Remount Officer, Sahiwal Horses, Mules and Cattle Breeding Area, Sahiwal. These documents have been placed on record through C.M. No.4960 of 2015 and by another miscellaneous application C.M. No.5894 of 2015 these letters have been sought to be assailed by seeking the permission for the necessary amendment to be made in the main petition.
6. The learned counsel for the respondents do not take cavil with the fact that it is the Government of Punjab and the Board of Revenue which is the competent authority to deal with these matters.
However, with a caveat that the terms of lease and whether it has to be granted to a particular person or not, is recommended by the Ministry of Defence and in particular the General Head Quarters, Rawalpindi. By a letter dated 7.7.2015 issued by the District Remount Officer and addressed to the District Collector, Sahiwal it was requested to take the State land on superdari and confirm that the land is free from all encroachment. This was the land in question in the instant constitutional petition. In the said letter, it has been brought forth that compliance of this Court's order dated 21.5.2015 has been made and that the ex-stud grantees were given the opportunity of four weeks to apply and appear before the competent authority and upon their failure to do so they were denied the right of re-grant of the land for another 10 years i.e. From 2014 to 2024.
However, this letter does not take into account the legal position with regard to the competent authority being the Member (Colonies) Board of Revenue, Punjab who has to adjudicate under the law the matter regarding the grant or re-grant of the lease under the terms of the Act, 1912.
Therefore, the statement made in the letter dated 7.7.2015 is not borne out from the record as the matter is still pending adjudication before the Member (Colonies) Board of Revenue, Punjab and has not culminated in a finding rendered by that officer. In pursuance of the letter dated 7.7.2015 the superdari has also been taken over by the District Collector, Sahiwal although the physical possession is still with the petitioners. This fact is also not denied by the respondents Nos.1 and 5 in the reply to the application C.M. No.5894 of 2015 in which the following statement on their part has been made:- "It is correct that the matter is still sub-judice before the Member (Colonies) Board of Revenue, Punjab, Lahore and next date of hearing is 19.02.2016. It is pertinent to mention here that the Member (Colonies) Board of Revenue, Punjab, Lahore is not the competent authority to adjudicate upon the matter as the said authority is only record keeping authority. It is worthwhile to mention here that land in question is on the disposal of Ministry of Defence and the competent authority is General Head Quarters (Remount) of Ministry of Defence and the Board of Revenue on the recommendation of Ministry of Defence allot or resume the stud land."
7. It is clear from a reading of the statement reproduced above that the said respondents agree that the matter is pending with the Member (Colonies) Board of Revenue, Punjab. However, the precise scope of the powers of Member (Colonies) Board of Revenue, Punjab has been disputed and it has further been stated that the Board of Revenue acts on the recommendations of the Ministry of Defence to allot or resume the stud land. Be that as it may, this fact ipso facto does not take away the power from the Member (Colonies) Board of Revenue, Punjab to adjudicate the matter and to return a final determination in this regard. The recommendations may come from the Ministry of Defence but the final order has to be passed by the Member (Colonies) Board of Revenue, Punjab.
8. In view of the above, these petitions are allowed. The matter pending before the Member (Colonies) Board of Revenue, Punjab is directed to be decided within a period of one month from the receipt of the order of this Court. The parties are on the notice and no further notice is required to be issued by the Member (Colonies) Board of Revenue, Punjab. The parties shall appear before the Member (Colonies) Board of Revenue, Punjab on 22.02.2007 at 11:00 a.m. It is further directed that all matters relating to the lease, subject matter of these petitions, shall be subject to the determination made by the Member (Colonies) Board of Revenue, Punjab.