' This is a revision petition against the order of Commissioner, Faisalabad, dated 29-11-1982 whereby he dismissed the appeal of the petitioner against the order of Colony Assistant/Collector, Faisalabad, dated 3-2-1982. Vide which he resumed. Square No,. 86/1, 2,3/1 8/1 9 to 12, 13/1, 18/1, 19 to 21 measuring 100 Kanals situated in Chak No,, 113/GB, Tehsil Jaranwala from the petitioner which was with him under Pedigree Livestock Breeding Scheme.
2. The facts of the case are that the disputed land was allotted to the petitioner under Livestock Breeding Scheme. The Assistant Director, Livestock and Dairy Development, after visiting the spot reported to the Colony Assistant/Collector, that the petitioner was not maintaining the required Bull and Sheep, The petitioner was served with a notice by the Colony Assistant/ Collector, as to why the land should not be resumed due to breach of condition. The Colony Assistant/Collector after hearing the petitioner and the Patwari of that circle and considering the report of the department observed that the petitioner was not maintaining, the requisite animals. He, therefore, vide his order, dated 3-2-1982 resumed the land in favour of State. Aggrieved by this order the petitioner filed an appeal before the Commissioner contending that he was maintaining the required number of animals. The Commissioner therupon deputed the Naib-Tehsildar concerned to visit the spot and report whether the petitioner was fulfilling the condition of lease. The Naib, Tehsildar reported that the petitioner was not maintaining the Sheep and Bull and in order to show the same he had borrowed Sheep from somebody else of the adjacent Chak. As regards Bull the petitioner had purchased the same aged about-2/3 years which was being used for the purpose for about 5/6 months back. The Commissioner after hearing the arguments of the petitioner and examining the report of the Revenue Officer observed that the petitioner had failed to maintain the required animals and thus had committed breach of condition, He, therefore, dismissed his appeal. Hence this revision petition.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at length, gone through the grounds of revision and perused the record of the case. -The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that he was keeping the Bull and Sheep and the Assistant Director, Animal Husbandry vide his Letter No,.
16152, dated 7-12-1981, to the address of Colony Assistant/Collector, Faisalabad, certified it. He stressed that the Colony Assistant/Collector vide his order, dated 3-2.1982 resumed the lot and included it in the Schedule of Temporary Cultivation. He contended that the Veterinary Officer visited the spot on 10-3-1982 and 3-8-1982 and issued certificate on 10.3-1982 and 1 5-12-1982 that the petitioner was maintaining the Bull and Sheep. He contended that although the petitioner was maintaining the requisite number of animals yet the Commissioner rejected this appeal. He urged that the impugned orders which were passed against the facts be set aside and the lot be restored.
4. I have considered the arguments and perused the record. In the order of the Commissioner it has been admitted that the petitioner was maintaining the Bull ; as regards Sheep it was held that they were borrowed However, the Veterinary Department has issued certificate on 15-12-1982 that the petitioner was maintaining the animals. Considering these aspect of the case, the impugned orders are set aside. The lot is restored to the petitioner with a warning that in future he would abide by the condition of lease. The Assistant Commissioner/Collector should watch to it. The Veterinary Department should also be directed to keep an eye on the performance of the petitioner. The revision petition is thus allowed. .