' ABDUL SHAKURUL SALAM, J.-Appellants' claim for properties abandoned in India was not being verified by the Claims Authorities when they approached this Court in Writ Petition No, 819/67 in which vide order dated 9-11-1967, it was directed that "The Claims Commissioner shall proceed to reconstruct the record on the basis of these duplicates and dispose of the petition in accordance with law." In due course, the claim of the appellants was verified by the Deputy Claims Commissioner in Schedules 1, VI and V of the Claims Registration Act, 1956, vide order dated 19-5- 1979. On 11-10-1979, the appellants submitted an application for issuance of entitlement certificate in respect of the claim verified under Schedule V, to the Chief Settlement Commissioner. This was refused on the ground that the appellants had not complied with the provisions of Martial Law Regulation No, 84 which required submission of M. R. I. On or before 20th February, 1961. They filed Writ Petition No, 48-R-82 in which it was contended that the claim of the petitioners was not verified prior to 1-9-1961, therefore, the entitlement certificate should have been issued on the basis of the claim verified by the Deputy Claims Commissioner under para.' 4 read with para. 6(3) of Martial Law Regulation No, 89." The plea was rejected on the ground that "The petitioners admittedly failed to file statement of true facts relating to their claim within the stipulated 'period, as such their original claim stood cancelled by virtue of sub-paragraph (3) of paragraph 3 of Martial Law Regulation No, 84 and therefore, it cannot be said that any claim was legally pending within the ambit of paragraph 4 of Martial Law Regulation No, 89, merely because the Deputy Claims Commissioner verified the claim of the petitioners subsequent to the enforcement of Martial Law Regulation No,
89. The claim of the petitioners stood cancelled by operation of law under the aforesaid provisions of Martial Law Regulation No,
84. This was a transaction past and closed. The Deputy Claims Commissioner, had, therefore, no jurisdiction in law to verify the claims of the petitioners notwithstanding the failure of the petitioners to comply with the mandatory provisions of paragraph 3(3) of Martial Law Regulation No,
84. The order of verification of claim is ex facie without lawful authority and therefore, the petitioners cannot be permitted to claim advantage under it in the exercise of writ jurisdiction, which is meant to foster justice and not to perpetuate an illegality." This is vide order dated 20-3-1983. The appellants filed appeal on 30-4-1980. Office noted that it was out of time. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that deducting the period spent until delivery of copy, no intimation having been given earlier, it is within time. In the application under section 5 of the Limitation Act, it is stated that the appellant No, 1 who was prosecuting the appeal had gone to Karachi where he fell sick due to gastric trouble. No rebuttal has been furnished. In the circumstances, the appeal is held within time and delay, if any, is condoned.
2. The case on merits is classical example of the story asking for waiver of saying prayers and being imposed with an application to keep fast as well. The appellants had come to the High Court asking for issuance of entitlement certificate in respect of Schedule V on the basis of the verification of their claim by the Deputy Claims Commissioner. Not only their petition was rejected but also the order of verification of claim which pertained to Schedules I and VI as well, by the Deputy Claims Commissioner was held to be without lawful authority. Nobody had challenged the verification of the claim by the Deputy Claims Commissioner. The learned Single Judge also fell in error in holding that the claim of the appellants is "cancelled by virtue of sub-paragraph (3) of paragraph 3 of Martial Law Regulation No, 89," because this Martial Law Regulation itself had been superseded and was re-constructed by the Martial Law Regulation No, 89 which itself in para. 4 provided that "Any claim pending for verification at the time of the commencement of this Regulation shall be verified by such officer not below the rank of an Additional Settlement Commissioner as may be appointed by the Chief Settlement Commissioner in that behalf." It is nobody's case that th Deputy Claims Commissioner who verified the claim of the appellants wa not a competent Officer to verify the claim. He verified the claim of the appellants on 19-5-1979.
Copy was delivered on 18-9-1979. The appellants on their application dated 11-10-1979 were clearly entitled to the issuance of entitlement certificate.
3. Learned counsel for the Settlement Department has submitted ; firstly that the appeal is not competent in view of section 3 of the Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972. Secondly, that the appellants were under legal obligation to have filed their statement of true facts under sub-paragraph (3) . Of paragraph 3 of Martial Law Regulation No,
84. It is thirdly contended that the Chief Settlement Commissioner was compete it to fix a date on which the statement of true facts was to be filed. It is fourthly submitted that the Martial Law Regulation No, 89 did not repeal Martial Law Regulation No, 84 and paragraph 4 of the Martial Law Regulation No, 89 only saved those claims wherein statements of true facts had been filed by the claimants under Martial Law Regulation No, 84.
4. The contentions have no force whatsoever. The contention regarding the competency of the appeal is without force for the reason that learned Single Judge has not only rejected the petition for issuance of entitlement certificate in respect of Schedule V but has held the order of verification of claim to be without lawful authority. The order was not only in respect of verification of claim under Schedule V but also under Schedules I and VI. Therefore, the order of the learned Single Judge is clearly appealable. As regards the contention that Martial Law Regulation No, 89 did not repeal Martial Law Regulation No, 84, it need only be said that when a law is re-constituted, it obviously means that the previous law has gone off of the Statute Book and it is the new C reconstituted law which shall operate. The claim of the appellants for the land abandoned during the disturbances on account of the creation of the country has been verified by the Authorities appointed by the State. It is unreasonable to urge that entitlement certificate should or cannot be issued. What is entitlement certificate ? It is only that when a claim is verified by a competent Officer in Bighas and Biswa s, it may be transformed and calculated in terms of Produce Index Units.
Now this little arithmetic exercise cannot be said to have the effect of taking away substantial rights of the citizens and nobody can say that he is not going to perform the functions of calculation entrusted to him by law. Refusal to issue entitlement certificate, in the circumstances, was clearly callous and arbitrary exercise of power.
5. In view of what has been stated above, the appeal is allowed with costs and the respondent No, 1 is directed to issue the requisite entitlement certificate to the appellants within the shortest possible time but not later than three months as much time has been wasted wantonly.