SHAHID BILAL HASSAN, J.--- The petitioners have called in question the order dated 24.10.201 1 passed by learned Member (Judicial-VIII), Board of Revenue, Punjab, whereby the revision petition of the petitioners against the order dated 13.6.2017 passed by Additional Commissioner , Lahore Division, Lahore by virtue of which he accepted the revision petition of the respondent setting aside the orders dated 10.1.2012 passed by Tehsildar/AC- 1, Sharaqpur and 25.1.2017 passed by District Collector , Sheikhupura, has been dismissed.
2. Heard.
3. The matter relates to partition of joint property/Khata. Initially , the petitioners approached the Tehsildar/AC-I, Sharaqpur through an application regarding partition of joint Khata which was decided in favour of the petitioners ex-parte , vide order dated 10.1.2012. Thereafter , the respondents' application (subsequently converted into appeal) regarding setting aside of that ex-parte order was dismissed by the District Collector , Sheikhupura, vide order dated 25.1.2017. Feeling dissatisfied, the respondents preferred an appeal before the Additional Commissioner (Revenue), Lahore challenging the order of District Collector , which was converted into revision petition and subsequently it was allowed by the Additional Commissioner , vide impugned order dated 13.6.2017, setting aside the order dated 10.1.2012 of Tehsilda r/AC-1, Sharaqpur and order dated 25.1.2017 of District 'Collector , Sheikhupura. The petitioners being aggrieved of the said order of Additional Com missioner preferred a revision petition before the learned Member (Judic ial-VIII), Board of Revenue, Punjab which was dismissed, vide impugned order dated 24.10.2017, upholding the order dated 13.6.2017 passed by Additional Commissioner (Revenue), Sharaqpur for a decision afresh regarding partition of joint Khata after hearing all the parties within two months of- receipt of order of learned Member , B.O.R.
4. It has come on record that the petitioners while moving the Tehsildar/AC-I, Sharaqpur in respect of partition of joint Khata did not implead the respondents as party , whereas they were necessary parties being joint share- holders in the Khata in question, thus the Petitioners obtained an ex-parte order dated 10.1.2012 in this respect in their favour . When the respondents became aware of the order of Tehsildar/AC-1 they approached the Tehsildar/AC-1 for setting aside the said ex-parte order but he instead of dealing with the same himself, forwarded it to the District Collector for permission of review as the ex-parte order was passed by his predecessor . The District Collector instead of passing any order in this regard, converted the said application into appeal and himself decided it on 25.1.2017 against the respondents observing that the same was time-barred, as the respondents had challenged ex-parte order dated 25.1.2012 after a lapse of about 5 years. The learned Member (Judicial-VIII), B.O.R. while dealing with the petitioners' revision petition rightly observed that the District Collector , under the law, ought not to have decided the application/appeal of the respondent himself and that the said application of the respondent was not barred by time as the respondents were not earlier aware of the ex-parte order dated 10.1.2012 passed by the Tehsildar/AC-1 and when they got knowledge of the ex-parte order , they made an application to the Tehsildar/AC-I for setting aside of that order , as the limitation had to run from the date of knowledge. Since the respondents being co-sharers in the joint Khata and being necessary parties were not impleaded as party before the Tehsildar-AC-1 while obtaining ex-parte order dated 10.1.2012, the learned Member (Judicial-VIII), Board of Revenue while passing the impugned order dated 24.1.2017 was also justified in remanding the case to the Tehsildar/AC -I directing him to decide the partition case afresh after hearing all the parties under relevant provisions of law strictly on merit within two months. Since the matter regarding partition of joint Khata is to be decided afresh by the Tehsildar/AC-I concerned wherein the respondents will be party as well, therefore, the petitioners should wait for the decision of the Tehsildar/AC-I afresh in this regard. At present the petitioners have no case to invoke the Constitutional jurisdiction of this Court through the instant writ petition. I find no illegality or irregularity in the impugned order of learned Member (Judicial-VIII), Board of Revenue, thus the same is upheld.
In view of what has been stated above, this writ petition having no merit in it is dismissed, accordingly .