' On an application (Annexure 'H') filed by respondent No, 2 and bearing the date 19-7-1975, respondent No, 1 proceeded to pass his order, dated 22-6-1976 whereby, on the basis of some report made by a Naib Tehsildar to the effect that Muhammad Hussain is the master-mind behind the fraud and forgery so that he had also procured a bogus allotment after getting the revenue record tempered and arranging false entries in Register R. L. II of village Mianwal, he directed not only that the area which is shown to stand in his name for 850 P. I. Units in. Village Sial be cancelled but also that a case be registered against 'him, for which purpose a separate direction to the same effect was also sent simultaneously to the S. H.
0., Malakwal.
2. This order is challenged in this constitutional petition. Learned counsel argues that after the repeal of Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act, 1958, respondent No, 1 did not have the power to entertain the application of Mukhbari bearing the date 19-7-1975 or pass any order thereon. This argument is not well-conceived because neither the relevant application has been made under section 10/11 of the aforesaid Act nor does it solicit any action thereunder. Muchless, did respondent No, 1 purport to act under those sections. In fact, it is a simple application made to a Revenue Officer to bring to his notice the mischief done to the relevant record in his sub-Division and, for the stated reason, he has found merit in this application to come to the conclusion that the relevant allotment is forged. It is clear that not a non-existant proceeding but only a valid one can be cancelled. Thus, the allotment purpotting to appear to have been made in the name of the petitioner has simply been declared ineffective by respondent No, 1 and this, he had the power to so declare. Contention of the learned counsel is, therefore, repelled.
3. His order to have a case registered against the petitioner is defended by the learned counsel for respondent No, 2 on the basis of the order passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No, 3300/B of 1978, which is briefly reported as 1979 P Cr. L J Note 60 at page 38. I have sent for and seen the original order, dated 28-8-1978. Therein, it has been held by my learned brother Muhammad Afzal Zullah, J., as his lordship then was, as under :- "The Assistant Commissioner did not commit any illegality nor acted without lawful authority in asking the police to perform their ordinary duty and function of registration and investigation of the case."
4. Hence, no valid objection can be taken by the petitioner with regard even to the other part of his order which relates to having a case registered against him.
5. There is no case made out for exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction and, hence, writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.