1. NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.-This petition is directed against the judgment dated 20-2-1975 by a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court in Writ Petition No. 91/R of 1971.
2. The relevant facts are that in a mutation proceedings under the Pakistan Rehabilitation Act pertaining to the inheritance of one Abdul Hafiz Khan (claimant displaced person) an order dated 1-2-1968 was passed by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Sargodha exercising the powers of the Deputy Settlement Commissioner whereby he held that Mst. Sakina was not the daughter of Abdul Hafiz Khan. This order was passed against the attestation of a mutation dated 10-2-1956 wherein she had been treated as the daughter of Abdul Hafiz Khan.
3. The heirs of Mst. Sakina, filed an appeal before the Deputy Commis--sioner, Sargodha District exercising the powers of the Additional Settlement Commissioner. This appeal was accepted by him vide his order dated 17-6-1969 whereby he held that Mst. Sakina was, indeed, the daughter of Abdul Hafiz Khan. While accepting the appeal, however, he conceded that he was accepting the revision.
4. Aggrieved by this order, the other contestants, namely, Niaz Muhammad, etc., the petitioners herein, filed a revision petition which was accepted by Ch. Ali Mohammad. Settlement Commissioner by his order dated 30-10-1970 on the ground that Capt. Jamshed Burki exercising the powers of the Addi--tional Settlement Commissioner could not have passed the order dated 17-6-1969 inasmuch as the proceedings before him were in the form of second appeal. According to him, the order dated 1-2-1963 passed by the Deputy Settlement and Rehabilitation Commissioner was an appellate order against which no second appeal was competent before Capt. Jamshed Burki He, therefore, accepted the revision and set aside the order of the Additional Settlement Commissioner without, however, adverting to the merits of the controversy regarding the paternity of Mst. Sakina. The heirs of Mst. Sakina, who are respondents herein, filed a writ petition before the Lahore High Court contending that the order of Capt. Jamshed Burki was in the nature of the revisional order and, in fact, Ch. Ali Muhammad, learned Settlement Commissioner had no jurisdiction to interfere with the same. The learned Single Judge in the High Court considered this matter in great detail and took note of all the relevant notifications on the subject and came to the conclusion that the order passed by Capt. Jamshed Burki was it the nature of a revisional order and was, therefore, perfectly within his jurisdiction and the order of Ch. Ali Mohammad itself was without lawful authority. Consequently, the writ petition was accepted and the order of Ch. Ali Mohammad dated 30-10-1970 was declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal consequence. This petition is directed against the last-mentioned order.
5. Mr. Abdul Aziz Qureshi, learned counsel for the petitioner, has frankly conceded before us that the view of the learned Judge in the High Court, that the order of Capt. Jamshed Burki dated 17-6-1969 was with jurisdiction and therefore, could not have been set aside by the learned Settlement Commis--sioner. Is not open to challenge. The only submission raised by him, therefore, was that inasmuch as the order of Capt. Jamshed Burki, Additional Settlement Commissioner was set aside on revision, the petitioner could not challenge the validity of the said order whereby Mst. Sakina was held to be the daughter of propositus (Abdul Hafiz Khan). This finding, according to the learned counsel, was not correct and had been arrived at by ignoring certain relevant circumstances such as Ahadnama of 1931. The death certificate of Mst. Sakina which was corrected at one stage and showed that she was the daughter of one Booti Khan as well as the statement of Mst. Sakina that she did not claim any share in the property of the deceased right-holder.
6. We do not think this case to be a fit one for interference. Capt. Jamshed Burki as the revisional Court had determined the question of fact, namely, whether Mst. Sakina was indeed the daughter of Abdul Hafiz Khan and as this finding of fact could not normally be interfered with in the exercise of the writ jurisdiction and we see no reason to depart from this rule in the circumstances of this case, there is therefore, no ground for interference with, the order of learned Judge in the High Court.
7. This petition must fail and is hereby dismissed.