' This petition under Article 199 of Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, has arisen in the following circumstances:- ' On 24-12-1990, the petitioner was granted an area of 2 Kanals 15 Marlas and 15 square feet of the State land on lease for the purpose of construction of a petrol pump by the Secretary, Government of Punjab, Colonies Department, which fact is evidenced from the lease deed, which was executed between the petitioner and respondent No,
4. A mutation viz. No,25854 dated 28-1-1991 was also sanctioned by the Assistant Collector and the petitioner was put in physical possession of the land by the Revenue staff, which fact is evidenced by the report Roznamcha dated 28-1-1991. Thereafter the petitioner applied for the grant of No-Objection Certificates to the District Magistrate as also to the Ministry of Natural Resources, Islamabad, which was duly granted to him. After having fulfilled all the formalities, the petitioner applied to the Lahore Development Authority for approval of the building plan in order to enable him to construct the petrol pump. It appears that on an objection raised by Water & Sanitation Agency, this application has been rejected on 5-1-1992.
2. Before the case could be argued on merits, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents No, 2 and 3 had raised a preliminary objection as to the maintainability of this petition on the ground that the petitioner has an alternative remedy available to him in form of an appeal against the order of rejection of the building plan under Regulation No, 10 of the Building Regulations, 1984.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, states that as the Director General is also the other officers of Authority have also expressed their views on the subject, no useful purpose will be served by filing an appeal before the Director General. The apprehension on the part of learned counsel for the petitioner is not well-founded. According to the regulation relied upon by learned counsel for the respondents No, 2 and 3, the order rejecting the building plan is appealable and in this case as the order was passed by the Director, the appeal would lie to the Director General. There is no reason to doubt that the matter shall not be decided by the Director General in accordance with law, and on merits.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner apprehends that the appeal may be dismissed on the ground of limitation. However, as the petition was pending in this Court, the learned Legal Adviser for Respondents Nos. 2 and 3 state that the Director General shall decide the appeal filed by the petitioner on merits and not only on the ground of limitation. The objection taken by learned counsel for the respondents as to the maintainability of this petition, therefore, prevails.
' Accordingly, this petition is dismissed, as being not maintainable without any order as to costs.
' The petitioner may, if so advised, file an appeal against the order of rejection of the building plan, which shall be decided within two weeks on merits and in accordance with law.