' The petitioner was declared as successful bidder in the auction held by the Zila Council, Sialkot for lease of rights to collect tax on transfer of immovable property for the year 1992-93 and his bid of Rs,2,45,00,000 was approved by the Zila Council vide Resolution No,8 of 1992.
2. In pursuance thereof, an agreement was entered into between the petitioner and the Zila Council on 28-6-1992. However, on an application made by another person, the auction made in favour of the petitioner was set aside by the Commissioner on 30-6-1992. That order was challenged in Writ Petition No,6161 of 1992, which was accepted with the consent of the respondents on 6-7-1992, on the ground that no such order could be made without hearing the petitioner.
3. In the post-remand proceedings, the Commissioner has, by virtue of the order dated 13-7-1992, once again set aside the auction in favour of the petitioner and directed re-auction of the rights to collect the said tax.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has raised the following contentions in support of this petition:--
(a) That the power under section 156 (a) of the Punjab Local Government Ordinance, 1979, to quash the proceedings of the Zila Council has admittedly not been delegated to the Divisional Commissioner and can only be exercised by the Provincial Government.
(b) That by the execution of the agreement between the petitioner and the Zila Council, the resolution of the Zila Council stood acted upon and its effect could not be nullified nor could the rights vesting in the petitioner be taken away.
(c) That the provisions of section 156(b) and (c) of the Ordinance which have been relied upon by the Commissioner, have no application to the facts of this case.
5. Rana Muhammad Arshad, Additional Advocate-General, on instructions from the respondents states that the power under section 156(a) does not vest in the Commissioner as the same has not been delegated by the Government. He has, however, argued that the impugned order has been passed under section 156(b) and (c) read with section 157 of the Punjab Local Government Ordinance, 1979.
6. It is not denied by the respondents that in pursuance to the resolution passed by the Zila Council, the agreement has been executed between the parties, whereafter the Zila Council has been receiving instalments from the petitioner. That being so, the question arises as to whether in the absence of delegation of powers to Commissioner under section 156 (a) of the Punjab Local Government Ordinance, 1979, the impugned order could be passed.
7. Admit. Notice.
8. Rana Muhammad Arshad, Additional Advocate-General accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. Stay matter
9. Notice to the respondents for an early date.
10. Rana Muhammad Arshad, Additional Advocate-General accepts notice for respondents Nos,4 and 5.
11. In the meantime, operation of the impugned order of the Commissioner is suspended provided the petitioner continues to abide by the terms of the agreement entered into between him and the Zila Council and also to furnish bank guarantee in the sum of Rs,24,50,000 to the satisfaction of respondent No,2 for the payment of this amount to the Zila Council in case this writ petition fails.
The bank guarantee shall be furnished within ten days.
Petition admitted.