CH. MUHAMMAD IQBAL, J. Through this constitutional petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1971 the petitioners have challenged the validity of the order dated 12.03.2008 passed by the Member, Federal Land Commission, Islamabad whereby the revision petition of the respondents Nos. 5 to 13 was accepted.
2. Brief facts of the case are that Mst. Jannat Bibi widow of Chirag Shah filed Declaration Form regarding her landed property equal to 37699-532 PIUs. She was allowed to retain 12000 PIUs while the excess area equal to 25699-532 PIUs was resumed in favour of the Punjab Land Commission.
The surrendered land was allotted to the tenants, including the present petitioner under Para 18 of MLR 1972. The respondents challenged the said order before the Chief Land Commissioner through an appeal which was accepted on 02.03.1998 and the case was remanded to the Land Commissioner, Faisalabad. The petitioners assailed the order dated 02.03.1998 through Writ Petition No.5594/1998 which was dismissed vide order dated 13.02.2001. In that consequence, mutation No.1064 dated 29.05.2001 was sanctioned.
Thereafter, the petitioners filed appeal against the mutation No.1064 dated 29.05.2001 before the DOR which was allowed vide order dated 06.12.2001. Against. the said order, the respondents filed an appeal before the Executive District Officer (Revenue) which was dismissed on 06.08.2003. The respondents filed revisions [ROR Nos.1590, 1521 and 1592 of 2003] against the aforesaid orders before the Chief Land Commissioner/Senior Member, Board of Revenue which were dismissed on 22.10.2007. Against the aforementioned orders, the respondents filed revision petition under Para 29 of the Land Reforms Regulations, 1972 and the Member, Federal Land Commission, Islamabad allowed petition on 12.03.2008 and partially set aside the orders dated 22.10.2007 and 02.03.1998 passed by the Chief Land Commissioner, Punjab to the extent of passing of directions to file declarations under Land Reforms Laws. Hence, this petition.
3. We. have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their able assistance.
4. The Chief Land Commissioner, Punjab vide order dated 02.03.1998 accepted the revision petition of the respondents and restored the land in their favour by holding as under: "8. Resultantly, the revision petition is accepted, the impugned order dated 26.10.1992 of the Land Commissioner, Faisalabad Division, is set aside and the orders passed by the lower forums regarding resumption of land from Mst. Jannat Bibi under the Land Reforms Regulations, 1972 and allotment of the resumed land under that Regulation are also set aside and the land restored to the person entitled to inherit the same under. The West Pakistan Muslim Persoral Law (Shariat) Act, 1962 subject to ceiling under the West Pakistan Land Reforms Regulation 1959 and the subsequent Land Reforms Regulations, 1972 and the Land Reforms Act, 1972."
The petitioners being tenants/allottees challenged the aforesaid order through Writ Petition No.5594/1998 which was dismissed on 13.02.2001. The petitioners never challenged the aforesaid order as such the same has attained the status of finality and has become past and closed transaction. Reliance is placed on Pakistan International Airlines Corporation v. Aziz ur Rahman Chaudhary and another (2016 SCMR 14). Thereafter, a Mutation No.1064/2001 dated 09.05.2001 was sanctioned in favour of the respondents. The revenue hierarchy mutated the land, in question through aforesaid mutation against which the respondents filed appeal which was accepted by the Deputy District Officer (Revenue) Chiniot vide order dated 06.12.2001 with following observation: The aforesaid Order was challenged by the respondents before the Executive District Officer, (Revenue), Jhang who dismissed the appeal on 7.8.2003 by holding as under: "6. I have heard the arguments and perused the record. It is an admitted fact that Mst. Jannat Bibi stood entered in the revenue record as owner of land equal to 37699.532 PIUS. Since the death or her husband, she was owner of more than ceiling fixed under Land Reform Rules. After the death of her husband, the mutations have directly been entered in favour of appellants instead of legal heirs of Chiragh Shah deceased. Without observing the conditions of ceiling contained in the order of Chief and Commissioner."
The respondents assailed the aforesaid order through revision petitions which were dismissed by the Chief Land Commissioner, Punjab vide order dated 22.10.2907 and observed as under: "6. As such, it is more than apparent that those mutations were totally in disregard and in violation of the order of the Chief Land Commissioner, Punjab dated 02.3.1993. The Revenue authorities/Revenue Officers concerned had no jurisdiction to bypass or violate such an explicit and clear directions of the Chief Land Commissioner, Punjab dated 02.3.1998. If the petitioners have any entitlement for inheritance or any land under the West Pakistan Muslim Personal Law (Shariat)
Application Act, 1962, they shall have to establish this entitlement before the District Collector/Deputy Land Commissioner. Since the impugned order of Executive District Officer Revenue/Land Commissioner, Jhang dated 07.8.2003 has been passed by following the text and the spirit of the order of the then Chief Land Commissioner, Punjab dated. 02.3.1998, there is no occasion or ground to interfere with the impugned order dated 07.8.2003. Consequently; all the three Revision Petitions rejected accordingly."
5. The respondents filed revision before the Federal Land Commission and assailed the order 22.10.2007 passed by the Chief Land Commissioner, Punjab but did not implead the petitioners, who were -party before the lower fora. The petitioners also moved an application under Order I, Rule 10, C.P.C before the Federal Land Commission to implead them as party in the revision petition but the same was illegally dismissed. It is settled law that in the absence of a necessary party, no effective decree or order can be passed. Reliance is also placed on the cases titled as Mst. Maqbool Begum and others v. Gullan and others (PLD 1982 SC 46), Muhammad Siddique (Deceased) through L.Rs. and others v. Mst. Noor Bibi (Deceased) through L.Rs. and others (2020 SCMR 483) and Province of Punjab through Secretary Excise and Taxation Department, Lahore and others v.
Murree Brewery Company Ltd. (MBCL) and another (2021 SCMR 305).
6. Further, it is settled principle of law that no one should be condemned unheard and if any adverse order is passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the opponent party, such order is termed as illegal and passed in violation of the principle of "due process or law" as enshrined in Article 10-A of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. Reliance in this regard is placed on the dicta rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan cited as Mrs. Shagufta Shaheen and others v. The State through D.G. NAB, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa another (2019 SCMR 1106) and Justice Qazi Faez Isa and others v. President of Pakistan and others (PLD 2022 SC 119).
7. In view of above, without touching the merits of the case, this writ petition is allowed, the order dated 12.03.2008 passed by the Member, Federal Land Commission is set aside. Consequently, the revision petition of the respondents Nos.5 to 13 shall deem to be pending before the Member, Federal Commission, Islamabad who after impleading the petitioner and other necessary parties of the case shall decide the same strictly in accordance with law: