' These are two appeals against the order of the Additional Commissioner (Revenue), Bahawalpur dated 26-9-1982 whereby he accepted the appeals of the respondents and allotted them Square No, 66/13 min 14 to 25 measuring 100 kanals and Square Nos. 66/1 to 12, 13 min measuring 100 kanals, respectively situated in Chak No, 182/7-R under Jadid Abadkari Scheme and directed them to deposit the outstanding instalments with Tawan within 3 months from the date of order and set aside the orders of the Deputy Commissioner/Collector dated 11-3-1979 vide which he had rejected the applications of the respondents for the exchange of the land.
2. The facts of the case are that the respondents were allotted 99 kanals and 100 kanals of land respectively in Chak No, 233/9-R under Jadid Abadkari Scheme. The respondents did not deposit any instalment from Kharif 1960 till 29-7-64 when their allotments were cancelled. The respondents applied for the deposit of outstanding instalments but their request was rejected on 19-11-1977. The respondents filed appeals against the cancellation of allotments before the Additional Commissioner who remanded the case for fresh decision. The respondents filed applications before the District.Collector for the implementation of the order passed by the Additional Commissioner. The District Collector rejected the applications considering that letter No, 1468- 71/817-CLIII, dated 26-4-1971 referred in appeal before the Additional Commissioner relates to the allotments under Grow More Food Scheme whereas the respondents were the lessees under Jadid Abadkari Scheme and the latter do not apply on them. Aggrieved by this order the respondents filed appeals before the Additional Commissioner who vide his order, dated 30-8-1978 accepted the appeals and directed the District Collector to allot Square No, 66/13 min, 14 to 25 measuring 100 kanals and Square No, 66/1 to 12, 13 min measuring 100 kanals situated in Chak No, 182/7-R to the respondents if there was no legal bar. The District Collector after considering the case that no exchange of land could be allowed under Abadkari Scheme rejected their applications with the direction that they should obtain definite orders from the appellate Court . The Additional Commissioner on appeals filed by the respondents passed a definite order and allotted them Square No, 66/13 min 14 to 25 measuring 100 kanals and Square No, 66/1 to 12, 13 min measuring 100 kanals respectively situated in Chak No, 182/7-R with the direction that they should deposit the outstanding instalments if any along with Tawan within 3 months. Hence these appeals.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The learned counsel for the appellant contended that the respondents were allotted Square No, 30/14 to 25 measuring 96 kanals and Square Nos. 39/1 to 12, 13 min 100 kanals respectively in Chak No, 233/9-R Tehsil Fort Abbas and that paid Rs, 125 each as advance on 20-11-1958 and 21-11-1958. The respondents thereafter did not pay any instalment and the lots were resumed on 29-7-1964. They filed appeals and the Additional Commissioner on 30.8-1978 remanded the cases with the direction that if there was no legal bar, the respondents be given alternate land in Chak No, 182/7-R. No alternate land as per policy of the Government, could be made in favour of the respondents, the Deputy Commissioner/Collector, therefore, vide his order dated 11-3-1979, rejected their applications. The Additional Commissioner thereafter in appeal allotted the land to the respondents against the provision of law without considering that the original allotments of the respondents were cancelled for breach of conditions and according to policy no alternate allotment could be made. To them, and the Additional Commissioner was not competent to make fresh allotments to the respondents of their own accord, but was to decide the appeals against the order, dated 11-5-79 in accordance with the law with regards to their allotment of Chak No, 233/9-R from where the respondents had abandoned their residence. He urged that the impugned order be set aside. The learned counsel for the respondents argued that the Additional Commissioner after considering the cases of the respondents and findings these identical with the case of Barkat Ali of Chak No, 235/HR whose allotment was cancelled for non-payment and thereafter this lot was allotted to someone else under Grow More Food Scheme was allowed to deposit the arrears within two months and allotted him the alternate land, allotted disputed land to the respondents. He urged that there was no wrong in the order of the Additional Commissioner which may be upheld.
4. I have considered the arguments of the parties and perused the record of the cases. The cases are being perused by Shan Ali Mukhtar-eAam of the respondents and not by the respondents themselves. The allotment was under Abadkari Scheme and was cancelled in year 1964. There is no provision in the scheme for allowing the exchange of the allotted area and when the original lease was cancelled its exchange could not in any way be allowed unless it was restored and the conditions of lease were fulfilled. The Additional Commissioner passed illegal orders against the provision of law. The Order is, therefore, set aside. The appeals are thus allowed.