1. ' Fazal Hussain petitioner had continuously been working as a Lambardar of Chak No,324/G.B., District Toba Tek Singh since 1936. Notice Annexure 'A' dated 20-4-1974 was issued to him by the Tehsildar/Assistant Collector Grade-I, Shorkot to show cause as to why the land allotted to him as a Lambardar may not be resumed because he got the allotment of the land while he was under suspension. This notice was brought under challenge by the petitioner by moving this Constitution petition before this Court on 3-9-1974, on which date, District Collector Lyallpur (now Faisalabad) was asked to submit a report and parawise comments within three weeks. The order of the Court was not complied with although several reminders were sent to the said respondent for submission of the report and comments. On 29:4-1976, it was noted by this Court that the respondent failed to comply with the order of the Court without any justification. The Collector was accordingly directed to depute some representative to appear before the Court alongwith the record and comments on the next date. On 18-5-1976 a Clerk from the office of the Collector appeared but he did not file any comments despite directions to do so. In consequence, the petition was admitted to full hearing on the said date. The petitioner in person has been heard. He states that he was appointed as Lambardar of the village in 1936 and that he had been performing the duties of his office without any interruption since then. He argued that action against him was taken on account of political consideration without any basis. The petitioner has given as many as 13 receipts to the learned Assistant Advocate-General to show that even today he is performing the functions of his office.
2. Learned Law Officer after necessary scrutiny of the documents, says that the said documents in possession of the petitioner appear to be genuine. Sufficient time was available to the respondents to rebut the allegations levelled against them by filing comments/written statement in the case.
3. This has not been done. The allegations so levelled thus stand unrebutted. The presumption in law is that the allegations levelled by the petitioner against the respondents are correct. The provisions of C.P.C. Apply to the Constitutional proceedings of this Court and as such judgment can be pronounced against the respondents under Order 8, Rule 10, C.P.C. It is contended by the petitioner that policy regarding grant of ownership rights to allottees of the land has radically been changed by the present Government. The Lambardars have been given the proprietary rights of such land under their allotments. Reliance has been placed by the petitioner on Notification No,3158- 90/1535.CV dated 15-10-1990. Undisputedly the petitioner is the Lambardar of the Chak No,324/G.B.
4. And is also in the cultivating possession of the land in question as its allottee. I am of the view that petitioner is also entitled to avail of the concession given to the Lambardars under the notification, referred to above. In the circumstances the notice under attack is set aside being without lawful authority. The case is sent back to the District Collector, Toba Tek Singh for grant of ownership rights to the petitioner within next 4 weeks without fail. Withthis observation, this Constitutional petition is allowed leaving the parties to bear their own costs. A copy of this order shall be sent to the District Collector, Toba Tel, Singh for its compliance.