' IRSHAD HASSAN KHAN, J.---This petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan calls in question the order dated 31-10-1973 passed by the Additional Chief Land Commissioner, Punjab, Lahore, whereby he amended the order dated 7-7-1970 passed by the Land Commissioner directing the petitioner to file declaration forms No, LC-XXI and XXII in the office of the Deputy Land Commissioner regarding the area, which he inherited from his father and son and issuing a further direction that the area which the petitioner purchased after determination of his holdings should be surrendered equal to its PI units from this entire holding according to his choice.
2. The sole grievance of the petitioner is that after repeal of Martial Law Regulation No,64 of 1959, by virtue of paragraph 32 of Land Reforms Regulation No,115 of 1972, the Chief Land Commissioner had no jurisdiction in the purported exercise of his suo motu powers to make a reference to the Additional Chief Land Commissioner, Punjab. Lahore, to review the determination of holdings of the petitioner which stood finally disposed of by order dated 7-7-1970 passed by the Land Commissioner, Sargodha.
3. Mr. Irfan Qadir, the learned Additional Advocate-General argued that the impugned order of the Additional Chief Land Commissioner, Punjab, Lahore, is saved under sub-paragraph (3) of paragraph 32 of the Land Reforms Regulation No,115 of 1972, which provides that repeal of the West Pakistan Land Reforms Regulation (No,64 of 1959), subject to the other provisions of the Regulation shall not affect any proceedings pending before an authority constituted or appointed under the said Regulation, immediately before the coming into force of this Regulation; which shall stand transferred. To such authority constituted or appointed under this Regulation as the Commission may, by order published in the official Gazette, specify in this behalf and the authority to which such proceedings are transferred shall, in such proceedings, act in accordance with the provisions of the said Regulation, as if it has been appointed under the said Regulation. Elaborating his submission, Mr. Irfan Qadir submitted that order dated 17-3-1971* of the Deputy Land Commissioner was examined in the Secretariat of the Punjab Land Commission. It, was found that the order was against the instructions of the Commission contained in Letter No, ASR-1202-67/5003-LC dated 9- 11-1967, which required that the land purchased by land owners already holding land in excess of the limit prescribed in paragraph 8 of Martial Law Regulation No,64 should be resumed.
Consequently with the approval of the Chief Land Commissioner, instructions were issued to the Deputy Land Commissioner, Mianwali by the Secretary Land Commission vide Letter bearing No,DSH-341/71/2395- LC dated 10-7-1971 for reviewing his order dated 17-3-1971. Mr. Irfan Qadir, however, frankly admitted that the Deputy Land Commissioner declined to review his order on the ground that judicial order passed by him was not open to review on the basis of administrative instructions. The Chief Land Commissioner agreed with the aforesaid order of the Deputy Land Commissioner. Subsequently, however, he in the exercise of his suo motu revisional jurisdiction, referred the matter to the Additional Chief Land Commissioner for disposal on merits after hearing the parties. Consequently, the Additional Chief Land Commissioner, Punjab, passed the impugned order on 31-10-1973 modifying the order dated 7-7-1970 of the Land Commissioner, Sargodha, to the extent that no choice could be given to Amir Abdullah Khan Rokhari so far as resumption of land purchased by him in violation of existing provisions of MLR 64 was concerned. The Additional Chief Land Commissioner further remanded the case to the Deputy Land Commissioner, Mianwali, for fresh decision in accordance with law. The petitioner filed revision petition before the Federal Land Commissioner under para 29 of Land Reforms Regulation 115, but the same was dismissed as time barred on 8-3-1974.
4. We have perused the departmental record and heard the parties at length. It is an admitted fact that no proceeding whatsoever was pending at the time of repeal of MLR 64 of 1959. The Deputy Land Commissioner rightly declined to abide by the administrative instructions on the ground that no interference was called for in the Judicial Order under any administrative direction. On the eve of repeal of MLR 64 vide para 32 of MLR 115 of 1972, no proceeding was pending to attract the application of sub paragraph (3) of paragraph 32 of MLR 115. The plea raised by Mr. Irfan Qadir that the impugned order could be served under clause (d) of sub-paragraph (3) of para. 32 of MLR 115 is devoid of any force, in that, no investigation/legal proceeding of remedy in respect of the impugned order was pending on the date of repeal of MLR 64 of 1959.
5. Furthermore, with the implementation of the directions contained in order dated 7-7-1971, the matter pertaining to the determination of holding of the petitioner declarant came to an end and the same were not either inquired into or sought to be reviewed during the currency of MLR 64 of 1959. In view of the above, the impugned orders are hereby declared without lawful authority and of no legal effect. The writ petition is accepted, but there shall be no order as to costs.