' The learned counsel for the petitioners has taken a very bold stand by asserting, firstly, that the petitioners do not want to gain a success on the basis of technical pleas opposed to the requirements of equity and justice. He asserts that the case be sent back to the notified officer who shall go into question of petitioners' entitlement and the land allotted against it and in case any excess is really found out after an honest inquiry, their allotment of land may be cancelled. This plea is supplemental to the principal plea that the petitioners are legal heirs of actual claimant/allottee who were never given any notice of the proceedings or heard by the officers dealing with those proceedings. It is further asserted that Mukhbari application was filed against a dead person because it was submitted against their predecessor-in-interest Muhammad Amin who had died way back in the year 1969.
2. The second part of the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioners is for the notified officer to consider on remand of proceedings. The fact, however, remains that if the petitioners being legal heirs of the deceased claimant/allottee were not heard, the orders will be of no effect qua their interest in the land in dispute. It follows from the plain language of the proviso to section 10 of Act XIV of 1975 that no order detrimental to the rights or interests of a party can be passed unless such a party has been given opportunity to be heard and in other words to defend his case.
This is also a requirement of rules of natural justice.
3. The above requirements not having been met, in the facts of this case, the impugned orders will stand vitiated. None of the Mukhbars who are respondents 2 and 3 turned up and they were ordered ex parte vide order of this Court, dated 11-4-1984. The department is also not present to contest the plea of petitioners regarding non service which is supported by an affidavit. In this way, it remains uncontroverted.
4. In view of above discussion, this writ petition is accepted, impugned orders, dated 17-5-1976, 16- 10-1976 and 16-12-1976 are set aside and case is sent back to the notified officer, who in keeping with the undertaking of the learned counsel for the petitioners, shall go into the question of entitlement and allotment made against units available in the entitlement certificate of the petitioners and then dispose of the matter in accordance with law.
' Since none has turned up on behalf of respondents to oppose this writ petition, there shall be no order as to costs.