' The dispute in this case relates to recovery of Government dues from the petitioners in respect of Property No, S-19-R-27, E. Plomer Building, 26, Shahrah-e-Quaid-e-Azam, Lahore.
2. Briefly, the facts are that the Additional Settlement Commissioner (Ind)/Settlement and Rahabilitation Wing, Punjab, Lahore, vide demand notice dated 14-5-1976 directed Hamid Ali Al- Makki one of the petitioners herein to deposit a sum of Rs,2,96,082.50 in cash in respect of the balance transfer price of the said property within 30 days from the receipt of the demand notice failing which the portion of the property transferred to the petitioner mentioned above was threatened to be resumed without any further notice. The petitoners challenged this document by means of this petition contending inter alia that the auction price which fell to the share of petitioner No,1/transferee was paid by him to the Settlement authorities through various compensation books and agreement of association duly accepted by them as detailed below:- S No.C.B. No. Date of tenderAmount (1)171263/LHR-V12-4-1962Rs. 4,650.00 (2)351350/KYC-D25-4-1982Rs.37,500.00 (3)804211/LHR-V31-1-1965Rs. 2119,000-00 (4)121857/KYV/D31-1-1965Rs. 34, 932.00 Total: Rs. 2,96,082.00'
3. This Court, by order dated 16-6-1976, passed the following order in respect of interim relief prayed for by the petitioner:- "As far as the interim relief is concerned, the resumption proceedings are not stayed unless the petitioner either pays or furnishes adequate security to the satisfaction of the Additional Settlement Commissioner concerned for the payment of Rs,2,96,082, which is the price for which the petitioner had purchased his portion according to para. 5 of the writ petition."
4. In compliance of the aforesaid order of this Court, petitioner No,1 deposited the amount in lump sum in August 1978. He was, however, granted 10 per cent rebate under the rules. The compensation books deposited by petitioner No,1 at the time of auction in the year 1962 were not adjusted all these years on account of certain proceedings in some other matter to which the petitioner was not a party as per memorandum No,1623/R,B./73 issued by the Deputy Settlement Commissioner (Ind), Punjab, Lahore, to petitioner No,1. It would be useful to reproduce the relevant portion of the memorandum which reads as follows:- "The position of the compensation books deposited against the price of the above-noted property is as under:-
(1) Compensation Book No, 171263/LHR-V of Said-ul-Hassan Razzaki for Rs,4,650. This CB was presented without association deed as such no adjustment could be made therein. Since the owner of the CB was pressing hard for the return of the CB, therefore the same was delivered to him.
(2) CB No, 351350/KYC, Mr Rahim Bux for Rs,37,500. Of Mr. Majid-ul-Maqi was asked to obtain original verification order from CB holder and produce the same but he did not do the needful.
Since this CB is suspected one no adjustment, therefore, can be carried out. You may collect the same and deposit the equivalent amount of the same in cash.
(3) CB No, 804211/LHR-V Rs,2,19,000. For Since the relevant record had been destroyed by the police on 7-11-1967, you were asked vide This Office letter No,1296/RB/71, dated 6-7-1971 to either intimate the address of the CB and auction-purchaser and furnish the same to this office but the needful has not yet been done. You are requested again to supply the same without any further delay.
(2) CB No, 121857/KYC/D, Hafiz Majid for Rs,34,932. Of Since the owner of the CB died on 26-11-1961 as reported by Enforcement Police therefore, agreement deed dated 30-1-1965 was not legal. The A SC (Ind) cancelled the said deed and you were informed, accordingly. You are, requested to deposit the said amount in cash.
' In view of the above position you are hereby given last opportunity to make good the payment within 15 days failing which the portion disposed of in your favour will be resumed and will be disposed of under the law.
(Sd. )
Deputy Settlement Comissioner (IND), Punjab. Lahore."
5. It is an admitted fact the petitioner deposited two compensation books in 1962 and two in 1965.
However, the Settlement Department failed to adjust these compensation books till 1973 when in pursuance of the application dated 15-5-1973 made by the petitioners, certain objections were raised as stated in the aforesaid memorandum. The petitioner was not provided an opportunity of being heard to explain his position neither any inquiry was conducted by the Settlement Department before refusing to adjust the compensation books for over ten years. Since disputed questions of facts are involved in this case and the question of adjustments of the compensation books awaits adjudication for the last 26 years, instead of remanding the case this Court by order dated 14-24989, directed the Chief Settlement Commissioner/Member, Board of Revenue to personally inquire into the matter after providing an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and thereafter submit his report to this Court which has since been received.
6. The learned Member (Revenue), Board of Revenue, Punjab/Chief Settlement Commissioner, Punjab, in his comprehensive report dated 25-3-1989, observed that considerable time was spent on obtaining/collecting the relevant record from various offices. He rightly observed in his report that the real issue, which, required consideration, was about adjustments of payment on account of compensation books, which the Settlement Department refused to accept being suspected/bogus and the question of refund demanded by the petitioners on account of the amount paid in cash. His findings on the four compensation books, in dispute are as follows:-- "(i) Compensation Book No,171263/LHR-V for Rs,4,650 is said to have been presented without association deed and the Settlement Department did accept it in payment and no adjustment was made against it. This Compensation Book was presented by one Sheikh Hafeez-ud-Din acting on behalf of the bidders and not by the petitioner himself and after rejection by the Department the same compensation book was delivered back to its owner under intimation to Sheikh Hafeez-ud- Din, in August, 1963."
' This finding of fact has been refuted by learned counsel for the petitoners. He submits that the compensation Book was never delivered to Sh. Hafeez-ud-Din and in any case he was not the owner of the property. Be that as it may, this being a disputed question of fact cannot be examined in these proceedings.
"(ii) Compensation Book No, 351350/KYC for Rs,37,500 was unverified and Majid-ul-Makki was asked to obtain the verification order and produce the same but he did not do so. Since this Compensation Book was suspected/bogus, no adjustment of payment was made. However, Mr Majid-ul-Makki was asked to collect the same and deposit the equivalent amount in cash. The Compensation Book was never collected and is still available on record."
This is again a disputed question of fact which cannot be challenged in these proceedings.
"(iii)The owner of the Compensation Book No,121867/KVY/D for Rs,34,932 is said to have died on 26- 11-1961 and the petitioner submitted the agreement deed dated 30-1-1965 purportedly made between him and the deceased which was obviously not legal and, therefore, the same was not accepted. Rather A SC (Industries) cancelled the said deed and informed the petitioner accordingly vide No,1083/RB/71, dated 7-6-1971. It would appear that he tendered an agreement deed between him and a deceased person. Furthermore, Mr. A.W. Wyne son of Mrs. Hafeez Majid, deceased informed the Chief Accounts Officer, Settlement Department, Lahore, through his registered letter dated 19-41966 (original on record) that he had not sent or submitted any association deed regarding the said compensation book after the death of his mother. This Compensation Book was also sent to the Director (Enforcement) alongwith the other documents for scrutiny whereafter its whereabouts are not known."
' I am also inclined to hold that no agreement could have been entered by the petitioner with the claimant of the compensation book, who is said to have died before the execution of the agreement.
"(iv) Regarding Compensation Book No, 804211/LHR-V for Rs,2,19,000 the position was explained by DSC (Enforcement) Lahore in his office note dated 25-5-1971. As per report, the compensation book was attached with the file of criminal case F.I.R. 172, Police Station Mozang dated 27-3-1965. The case was sent up for trial and the accused were ultimately discharged and the police file along with original documents was destroyed on 7-11-1967 according to rules. It is, however, not known whether Compensation Book and agreement deed were received back by the accused upon discharge or not. In either case Settlement Commissibner did not receive it back. However, the petitioner was requested to intimate the address of the accused or whereabouts of the Compensation Book and Auction-Purchaser and after some time the name of the accused was intimated in 1973 as Mr. Nasir Ali Shah son of Khan Bahadur Syed Nathey Shah, Sabzy Mandi, Gujranwala by the petitioner but at the same time the petitioner stated that the address of the accused had no bearing on the adjustment of the amount of the Compensation Book against the price of his portion. The record does not show further progress of the case in this respect. It would therefore be desirable that a further enquiry probe into the matter is conducted to arrive at a finding in respect of the whereabouts of this Compensation Book."
7. I am unable to agree with the learned Chief Settlement Commisioner that the question of adjustment of return of payment in respect of Compensation Book No,804211 requires further inquiry, inasmuch as, the Chief Settlement Commissioner was given ample opportunity to hold a proper inquiry, but he failed to give any finding that Compensation Book No,804211 was a bogus document. The Settlement Authorities also at no stage recorded a finding to the effect that the said Compensation Book was either suspected or found bogus. The mere fact that the compensation book in question was attached with Case No,172 dated 27-3-1965 under Sections 409/360/466/471, P.P.C. Registered at Police Station, Mozang Lahore is not a valid ground for not adjusting the compensation book deposited by the petitioners against its transfer price, particularly when according to a finding of fact recorded by the Chief Settlement Commissioner himself, the accused was ultimately discharged in that case and the police file along with the original documents was destroyed on 7-11-1967 according to the rules. There is, therefore, no basis to hold a further inquiry whether compensation book or agreement deed were received back by the accused upon discharge or not. The petitioners were admittedly not a party to the attachment of the compensation book in the said criminal case. They cannot, therefore, be penalized for an act of the Court, even if it is assumed that the compensation book was returned to the accused. In any event, the file of the Criminal Court along with the original documents has since been destroyed, no useful pupose would be achieved by remanding the case to the notified officer, especially, when notwithstanding the vast resources available at the disposal of the learned Chief Settlement Commissioner, he has failed to ascertain whether or not the compensation book was received back by the accused when he was directed by this Court to hold an enquiry into the matter.
Furthermore, at no stage it was held by the Settlement authorities that the said compensation book was bogus. Be that as it may, the learned counsel for the petitioners made a statement at the Bar that the petitioners are willing and ready to execute a surety bond that in case, at any stage, it is found by a competent Court that the petitioners have received back or utilized the compensation book or were privy to fraud in respect thereof with a third party, they will refund the amount.
8. In view of the above, I am not inclined to remand the case for further inquiry as it would tantamount to prolong the agony of the petitioners. In the result, the refusal of the Settlement Department to adjust the Compensation Book No, 804211/LHR-V for Rs,2,19,000 deposited by petitioner No,1 against the balance transfer price of the property, in dispute, is declared as without lawful authority and of no legal effect. Since petitioner No,1 has already deposited the said amount in cash with the Settlement Department, in compliance with the order dated 16-6-1976 passed by the Notified Officer concerned after adjustment of ten per sent rebate availed by him subject to the petitioner's furnishing a surety bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Secretary (Ind)/Notified Officer appointed under Section 2 (2) of the Evacuee Property and Displaced Persons Laws (Repeal) Act, 1975. The said amount shall be refunded to the petitioners within fifteen days from funishing the surety bond. The Notified Officer is also directed to issue Transfer Order to the petitioners in respect of their share in Property No, S-19-R-27, E Plomer Building, 26-Shahrah-e- Quaid-e-Azam, Lahore, on payment of requisite transfer fee. To this extent the writ petiton is accepted, but parties shall bear their own costs.