1. ' ABDUL HAYEE KURESHI, C.J.-- The facts of this case are identical to the facts in Constitutional Petition No. 840/81 except for the difference that the number of the plot purchased by the petitioner is B/354, Unit No. 8, Latifabad, Hyderabad, that this is a residential plot and the area is 600 sq. yards, and the price is Rs. 12,000. There is no contest on the point that the petitioner is the owner of the plot.
2. ' As admitted by Mr. Abdul Fatah Memon, and stated by Mr. Hamid Hussain some persons have encroached upon the plot. These persons have been given "entitlement slips". We are informed by the Advocates that by virtue of such entitlement slips, the recipients/ respondents would be entitled to remain on the plot of the petitioner and to be transferred such portion of the land of the plot, which was in their occupation, at the time of establishment of Katchi Abadi. We may at this stage state that such entitlement slips show that these have been given by virtue of power under Martial Law Order No. 67 Zone 'C', and simultaneously, we may also state that the said Martial Law Order does not provide for issuance of any such entitlement slips as have been given.
3. ' In these circumstances, the petitioner has claimed the following reliefs:- "(1) Declaring that in view of the allotment order, dated 29th January, 1963 the petitioner is a lawful and exclusive owner of the plot No. 354 Unit No. 8, Latifabad, Hyderabad.
(2) Further declaring that the respondents No. 1, 2 and 3 have acted unlawfully by issuing entitlement slips to the respondents Nos. 4 to 13 in relation to the petitioner's plot and that the entitlement slips issued by the respondents Nos. 1, 2 and 3 are of no legal consequences having been issued without lawful authority and therefore, the entitlement slips cannot be given any legal effect.
(3) Directing the respondents Nos. 1, 2 and 3 to act in accordance with law by cancelling the entitlement slips, ejecting the tres passers and to hand over the vacant possession to the petitioner in plot No. B-354, Unit No. 8, Latifabad, Hyderabad."
4. ' The title of the petitioner is not in dispute. It, is therefore, declared that the petitioner is lawful and exclusive owner of the plot in question.
5. 'In relation to the claim of encroachers, who are respondents Nos. 6 to 13 before us, it must be straightaway stated that they have not come on the plot by permission of the petitioner, and that the Government of Sind has by a Notification, dated 14-9-1983 (placed on record in Constitutional Petition No. 840/81) categorically excluded the plot in question from the list of Katchi Abadis.
6. Respondents Nos. 6 to 13 therefore, cannot lay any claim to this plot by making an averment that it is a Katchi Abadi. We have already expressed our view in regard to the invalidity of the entitlement slip.
7. ' Mr. Hamid Hussain has not opposed the grant of relief, but he states that as far as obtaining of possession from the encroachers is concerned, the petitioner may seek a remedy at a forum which may be proper. To that extent we agree.
8. ' This petition is allowed to the following extent:-
(i) That the petitioner is declared to be the owner of the plot.
(ii) That the persons in occupation are mere encroachers, who can be evicted in due course of law.
(iii) The entitlement slips are declared to be of no legal effect for the reasons that Martial Law Order 67 does not provide for that, and in any case under Notification by the Government of Sind the plot in dispute had been excluded from the list of Katchi Abadis."