' After verification of the rural claim, the petitioner was allotted an area measuring 18 Kanals 19 Marlas at Khata No.26 of Register R.L. II, in village Kot Jai Singh, Tehsil and District Gujranwala, on 28- 12-1951. He had urban claim as well. After verification thereof, he was made allotment of 31 Kanals 6 Marlas in lieu thereof in village Aimanabad, Tehsil and District Gujranwala on 19-4-1960. Haji Muhammad and Abdul Waheed filed an appeal against the former's allotment, dated 28-12-1951 saying that the petitioner had got his claim satisfied in village Aimanabad and thereafter he had got the allotment in question in village Kot Jai Singh. The petitioner contested the appeal and urged that the appellant had no locus standi. The plea was accepted. However, the officer proceeded to observe that "so far as the question of double allotment is concerned, I have seen the report of Central Record Room which shows that the land in village Kot Jai Singh was allotted to the respondent on the same claim which had already been satisfied. It is a case of allotment in excess of the right. The allotment obviously is illegal. I will take up this matter separately of my own accord.
So far as the appellants are concerned, the appellants have no locus standi. I dismiss the appeal."
This is vide order, dated 15-3-1971. Respondents Nos. 2 and 3 filed a Mukhbari application under section 10/11 of the Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act, 1958, which was finally taken up by an Additional Settlement Commissioner who in view of the aforesaid order of the Additional Settlement Commissioner, dated 15-3-1971, cancelled the allotment in village Kot Jai Singh and observed that the cancelled area should be forfeited in favour of the Central Government but if later on the Mukhbars prove that no move for the cancellation had been made by anybody, then they may be allotted the land. This is vide order, dated 21-10-1976. Hence, this Constitutional petition.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has narrated in his petition the transfer of the case from one Court to the other and has submitted that the petitioner was never issued any notice nor heard by the Additional Settlement Commissioner who has passed the impugned order. Secondly, it is submitted that the order proceeds on the basis' of the earlier order of the Additional Settlement Commissioner, dated 15-3-1971 in which the allegation was that the petitioner had got his claim satisfied in village Aimanabad and thereafter got allotment in village in question Kot Jai Singh.
Learned counsel submitted that this is quite incorrect. The petitioner had got the allotment in village Kot Jai Singh in the year 1951 in lieu of his rural claim and the allotment in village Aimanabad is dated 19-4-1960 in lieu of the urban claim. Therefore, there was no question of having got allotment in village Kot Jai Singh after the satisfaction of the claim. Besides that the claims were of two differ kinds of land rural as well as urban which have been separately settled.
3. Learned counsel for the Settlement Department has submitted that the plea of the petitioner is that he was not heard. The case may be remitted to the learned Member, Board of Revenue, for entrustment to a notified officer for re-hearing. It is secondly contended that the reliance of the petitioner of allotment in village Kot Jai Singh is on Parchi Taqseem (Annexure 'B') and not on the Register R.L. II.
4. Taking the last contention first, the allotment in village Kot Jai Singh is an established fact and that is the allotment which is being cancelled vide the impugned order. There is no doubt about that the allotment was confirmed as far back as 34 years. It is too late in the day to turn round and start judging as to what had happened long ago. Nobody demised at the time the allotment was made. It is a petty allotment. The refugee is entitled to remain in peace after such a long time. The reason on the basis of which the allotment was cancelled was that after the satisfaction of the claim in Aimanabad, the allotment had been got in village Kot Jai Singh. This is factually incorrect.
The allotment in village Aimanabad was obtained in 1960 and the allotment in villge Kot Jai Singh in 1951. The latter was obviously obtained much earlier than the allotment in village Aimanabad.
The basis being knocked out, there is nothing to sustain the superstructure. The impugned order, dated 21-10-1976 is declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect. The writ petition is, accordingly, allowed but in the circumstances the parties shall bear their own costs.