MOHAMMAD SHERAZ KIANI, J.--- Through this petition filed under section 44 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act, 1974, petitioners have implored the following relief:- "It is therefore, very humbly prayed that the writ petition may kindly be accepted and appropriate writ in favour of petitioners against the respondents may kindly be issued whereby the respondents may kindly be restrained and prohibited from taking illegal steps in respect of mutation No,1015 sanctioned on 21.02.2009, whereby land entered in survey No, old 27 presently 1011/ 1 measuring 9 marlas 1036, 10 kanal 2 marlas and 1035, 9 marlas total 11 kanal situated at Gulshan peer Allou-ud-Din has been entered in the ownership and possession of petitioners. Any other relief which the petitioners are entitled may kindly be granted in the interest of justice."
2. Precise facts of the case are that land bearing survey No,27 min old measuring 11 kanals was purchased by predecessor in interest of petitioners from the land owner's through a registered sale deed and same land was declared as crown land under Council order 282/57, and later on the same land was sanctioned through mutation No,1015 in favour of legal heirs of vendee. It is further contended that the said land have been under the possession and ownership of the petitioners for more than fifty years. It is further averred that survey No,27 min old measuring 2 kanal was also allotted in favour of Abdul Waheed Khan and his brother but the same land was acquired by the Govt. through two different awards dated 06.05.1979 and 30.01.1985 respectively, and they received the compensation of 2 kanals and 6 marlas instead of 2 kanals from the said awards. It is contended that one Abdul Haleem Khan son of Abdul Waheed Khan moved an application for cancellation of mutation sanctioned in favour of the petitioners and the official respondents due to political pressure have processed the application and prepared some reports and when the petitioners came to know about these proceedings they have filed objections and stated that the land allotted to Abdul Waheed Khan and others has already been awarded and they have received its compensation in excess of their entitlements. The precise stand of the petitioner is that respondents may be restrained and prohibited from taking illegal steps in respect of mutation No,1015 sanctioned on 21.02.2009 in favour of the petitioners, hence the subject matter of captioned writ petition.
3. Pre-admission notices were issued to the respondents for filing parawise comments.
Respondents Nos,1 and 3 filed the same on 12.07.2013. Comments on behalf of respondents No,3 and 4 were filed on 03.07.2013. Writ petition was admitted for regular hearing on 19.02.2014 and respondents were directed to file written statement and other relevant documents. On 13.03.2015, respondents Nos,4 and 5 requested the Court that comments already filed on their behalf may be treated as written statement.
4. Mr. Yaqoob Khan Mughal, the learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the points raised in the petition and submitted that petitioners and their predecessor in interest have remained in possession of the land continuously for more than 50 years. He further argued that out of survey No,27 min old measuring 2 kanals was also allotted in favour of Abdul Waheed Khan and his brother. The Government through award dated 06.05.1979 acquired 1 kanal 11 marlas and through award dated 30.01.1985 further piece of land measuring 15 marlas was also acquired and the aforesaid persons received compensation for 2 kanals and 6 marlas whereas they were only entitled for compensation of 2 Kanals land. The learned counsel further maintained that on the application of one Abdul Haleem Khan for cancellation of mutation sanctioned in fovour of the petitioners and officials respondents are now going to cancel the mutation without observing law and rules on the subject. The proceedings under process before the respondents are totally misuse of power, illegal exercise of jurisdiction and just based on political pressure. Finally, the learned counsel prayed that by accepting the writ petition, respondents may kindly be restrained and prohibited from taking illegal steps in respect of mutation No,1015 presently survey Nos, 10100/1 measuring 9 marlas 1036, 10, Kanal 2 marlas and 1035, 9 marlas total 11 kanals situated at Gulshan Peer Allou-ud-Din.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and gone through the record of the case with utmost care.
6. The main relief sought by the petitioners is the protection of mutation No,1015. Now it is to be seen, whether entries recorded therein can be changed, rectified or not by the official respondents.
For having true perception, I would like to reproduce sections 43, and 44 of The West Pakistan Land Revenue Act, 1967, which reads as follows:---
43. Making of that part of periodical record which relates to other persons;- The acquisition of any interest in land other than a right referred to subsection (1) of section 42 shall;- (a)if it is undisputed, be recorded by the Patwari in the prescribed manner; and (b)if it is disputed, be recorded by the Patwari in the register of mutations and dealt with in the manner provided for in subsections (6) to (11) of that section.
44. Determination of disputes:- (1) If during the making, revision or preparation of any record, or in the course of any inquiry under this Chapter, a dispute arises as to any matter of which an entry is to be made in a record or in a register of mutations a revenue officer may of his own motion, or on the application of any party interested, but subject to the provisions of section 45, and after such inquiry as he thinks fit, determine the entry to be made as to that matter and record his reasons thereof . Furthermore, Section 163 of the Act, reads as under;- 163;-Review, (1) A Commissioner, Collector or an Assistant Collector, may, at any time, on his own motion, review any order passed by himself or any of his predecessors in Office, and on reviewing modifying, reverse or confirm the same.
Therefore, in view of above provisions of law, the concerned authority is quite competent to make correction of any wrong entries at any time even on his own motion. Moreover, the authority cannot be stopped from making any lawful act. When the law vests powers upon the Revenue Officials to make, corrections through prescribed mode in the entries recorded in any mutation or even in periodical records etc then there is no justification for this Court to issue a prohibition from doing a lawful act. Only an unlawful act can be restrained. Furthermore, if any correction is made by the authority, obliviously the aggrieved party would have the remedy by way of appeal, revision etc, before the higher forum. Mutation No,1015 cannot be treated as sacrosanct and untouchable.
The crux of above discussion is that finding no substance in the instant writ petition, hence, the same is hereby dismissed, however, with no order as to the costs.