M. S. H. QURESHI, J.-This dispute relates to evacuee trust land measuring 27 kanals 8 marlas in village Ghaziwal, Tehsil Narowal, District Sialkot. This land was initially allotted to Mst. Rahim Bibi (mother of Mst. Resham Bibi respondent No. 1) on 19-2-1962. Late, she paid the price and acquired proprietary right, which was duly entered by way of mutation attested on 18-7-1967. The Border Area Committee, however, on 25-11-1967 cancelled her allotment for the reason that the confirmation had taken place without their consent and simultaneously resumed the land and allotted the same in favour of Agha Hussain (petitioner). This led to litigation, which ultimately came up before the High Court in Mst. Rahim Bibi's Writ Petition No. 231/R of 1972. She having died later, Mst. Resbam Bibi respondent was substituted for her. The writ petition was accepted on 2-12- 1980, in the result of which the case was remanded to the Border Area Committee for first determining the question of its jurisdiction in the matter before taking a decision. The Committee, by its order dated 18-8-1931, not only declared that it had jurisdiction in the matter but also reversed its earlier finding that Mst. Rahim Bibi had been a local, and held her to be a Jammu and Kashmir displaced person and as such restored her allotment and cancelled that of Agha Hussain.
This order of the Border Area Committee was challenged by Agha Hussain in Writ Petition No. 490/R of 1981, but the same was dismissed in limine on 30-9-1981. Aggrieved by this he has moved this petition for leave to appeal.
2. The contention is that the Border Area Committee having earlier adjudged Mst. Rahim Bibi to be a local could not re-open the matter an that there was no further evidence upon which the Committee could declare her to be a Jammu and Kashmir refugee. It is further argued that allotment made in favour of Mst. Rahim Bibi, being in the nature of maintenance, could not survive after her death and the land must revert to the Border Area Committee. We find that the contentions have no force. There is material to justify the view taken by the Border Area Committee that Mst. Rahim Bibi was a Jammu and Kashmir refugee. The Committee had duly noted in its order dated 18-8-1981 that: There is also no dispute that proprietary rights had been conferred on her a early as 18-7-1967 and as such it could not be said that the land had thereafter remained in her temporary allotment by way of maintenance. There is thus no good reason to interfere with the view taken by the High Court. The petition is dismissed.