' ALI HUSSAIN QAZILBASH, J.--This is a petition for leave to appeal from the order of a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, dated 7-3-1981, whereby the constitutional petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed.
2. The petitioner was allotted State land measuring 71 kanals 4 marlas situate in Chak No,200/GB, Tehsil Samundri, District Faisalabad, under the Tenants Scheme which was later on converted into 'Ejected Tenants Scheme'. An application was made by the petitioner for grant of proprietary rights in respect of the aforesaid land under the instructions issued by the Government of West Pakistan in 1960.
3. In the year 1969 the Collector, Faisalabad, resumed an area comprising Killa Nos. 19 and 20 of square No,43 and reserved the same for Chiragah vide order, dated 14-1-1969. This was appealed against before the Additional Commissioner who accepted the same on 14-9-1977 and remanded the case to the Collector for decision afresh. As a result of hearing the Collector, Faisalabad, vide his order dated 2-5-1979 allowed the petitioner to acquire proprietary rights of area measuring 64 kanals out of the allotment held by him and resumed the remaining 7 kanals 4 marlas. The appeal of the petitioner from the above order was dismissed by the Additional Commissioner, Sargodha, on 12-5-1979 and his revision was also dismissed by the Member, Board of Revenue, on 28-8- 1979.The petitioner ultimately took up the matter to the High Court but there too did not succeed and his writ petition was dismissed on 7-3-1981.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and he pointedly invited our attention to para 2(xi) of the Scheme for transfer of proprietary rights of the State Land etc. Issued under Letter No,Col.-8/24-57(4167), dated 8th October, 1960 by the Government of West Pakistan, Revenue and Rehabilitation Department, which clearly lays down that 'the option to purchase will have to be exercised for the whole lot with a person and not only in respect of only a part of it' and submitted that the learned Judge in his Chambers has acted illegally in relying on the later instructions issued by the Government on 22-1-1971 and thus refused his claim to the entire land. He further submitted that the instructions, dated 22-1-1971 are not retrospective in operation and, therefore, ineffective upon his rights.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner we think that the case requires consideration.
We, therefore, grant leave. Security Rs,5,000. The appeal shall be heard on the present record with liberty to the parties to file additional documents, if any.
6. To be heard alongwith the appeal arising from Civil Petition No,726 of 1982.