S.A. NUSRAT, J.--This appeal by leave of this Court, has been brought to challenge the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 18-1-1977 which was passed in the background of the following facts.
2. The dispute in this case relates to the residential portion of property No.S36-R-40, Railway Road, Lahore and is at present confined between the appellants on the one hand and respondent No.2 on the other. On the 11th of June, 1960 the house in dispute was' transferred to the appellant No.1 by Deputy Settlement Commissioner on her NCH form. She, having associated with appellant No.2 on 20-2-1961, surrendered her share in the property in his favour and an amended PTO was accordingly issued on 22-2-1961. Munshi, father of respondent No.2 failed in his appeal against the said order. However, he succeeded in revision and the case was remanded by the Settlement Commissioner to the Deputy Settlement Commissioner for fresh disposal on 2-3-1964. The appellants herein successfully challenged the validity of that order in Writ Petition No.1168/R of 1969 and the High Court finding that the impugned order before it was without lawful authority and of no legal effect sent the revision back to the Settlement Commissioner exercising powers under section 3 of the Evacuee Properties Displaced Persons (Repealed) Act, 1975 for fresh disposal in accordance with law after hearing the parties. On such remand Settlement Commissioner Lahore Division Lahore, entrusted the case vide order dated 3rd of July, 1976 to Mr. Manzoor Ahmad Malik, Additional Settlement Commissioner, Farid Kot House, Lahore. In turn on 4th October, 1976, the said learned Additional Settlement Commissioner further made over the case to the Deputy Settlement Commissioner for de novo disposal. The appellants challenged the validity of this order in writ jurisdiction which was dismissed in limine as per impugned judgment.
3. In the background of the above facts leave to appeal was granted to examine the question regarding the jurisdiction of Mr. Manzoor Ahmad Malik, Additional Settlement Commissioner, Farid Kot House, Lahore to entertain the revision entrusted to him and to further remit the case to the Deputy Settlement Commissioner for fresh disposal in accordance with law. In this connection it is to be- noted that on the 30th September, 1984, the Evacuee Property and Displaced Persons Laws (Repeal) Ordinance XV of 1974 was promulgated (which was later replaced by Evacuee Properties Displaced Persons (Repeal) Act No.XIV of 1975. It had the effect of inter alia, repealing the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958. Section 2(2) of the Ordinance expressly provides that upon the repeal of the Act, all proceedings which, immediately, before such repeal, may be pending before the authorities appointed there under shall stand transferred for final disposal to such officers as may be notified by the Provincial Government in the official Gazette and all cases decided by the Sup--reme Court or a High Court after such repeal which would have been remanded to any such authority in the absence of such repeal shall be remanded to the officers notified as aforesaid. Subsection (3) further lays down that any proceedings transferred or remanded to an officer in pursuance of subsection (2) shall be disposed of by him in accordance with the provisions of the Act thereby repealed to which the proceedings related.
4. The order of remand passed by the learned High Court in Writ Petition No.1168/R of 1969 reads as follows: "For the reasons stated above, the impugned order is declared to be without any lawful authority and of no legal effect. This case shall, therefore, go to the Settlement Commissioner exercising powers under section 3 of the Evacuee Properties Displaced Persons (Repeal) Act, 1975 to hear the parties, peruse the record and decide the case afresh in accordance with law. He may also consider any application being made for condonation of delay or for impleading petitioner No.2, if filed by the respondent No.2. There will be no order as to costs."
5. In terms of the above directions of the High Court the revision petition of the appellants had to be decided only by a Settlement Commissioner exercising powers under section 3 of the Evacuee Properties Displa6ed Persons (Repeal) Act, 1975 . And no power of further entrustment of the case could be exercised by any designated Settlement Commissioner muchless by an officer having no such power. As respects the jurisdiction to deal with the case is concerned it is admitted on all hands that Mr. Manzoor Ahmed Malik, to whom the case was entrusted by the Settlement Commissioner, Lahore Division, Lahore was not one of the designated officers having jurisdiction to deal with the remanded revision application. In this view of the matter, we would. Therefore, accept this appeal and set aside the impugned judgment of the learned High Court and the order of the learned Additional Settlement Commissioner (Mr. Manzoor Ahmed Malik) dated 4-10-1976 and direct that the pending revision application of the appellants shall be disposed of strictly in accordance with the directions of the High Court reproduced hereinabove issued in Writ Petition No.1168/R of 1969, by the authorised Officer having jurisdiction to deal with such cases in accordance with law after notice to the parties.