JUDGMENT ZIA MAHMOOD MIRZA, J.- This order will dispose of the following 40 writ petitions as the grievance agitated and the relief sought in all these petitions is almost identical:- ((Table Start))1. W.P.504-94 2. W.P.8814-92
3. W.P.2337-92 4. W.P.8813-92
5. W.P.5374-92 6. W.P.5171-92 _
7. W.P.702-92 8. W.P.703-92
9. W.P.705-92 10. W.P.17423-92
11. W.P. 16507-93 l2. W.P. 16125-93
13. W.P.17577-93 I 14. W.P.15402-93
15. W.P.I 7249-93 I6. W.P. 16796-93
17. W.P.1076-94 18. W.P.2313-92
19. W.P.2312-92 20. W.P.I 1255-91
21. W.P.11247-91 22. W.P.10020-92
23. W.P.1111-92 24. W.P.547-92
25. W.P.546-92 26. W.P.10021-92
27. W.P.10062-91 28. W.P.3230-92
29. W.P.3228-92 30. W.P.11757-92
31. W.P.5173-92 32. W.P.696-92
33. W.P.11993-91 34. W.P.11994-91
35. W.P.704-92 36. W.P.697-92
37. W.P.698-92 38. W.P.699-92
39. W.P.700-92 40. W.P.701-92((End Table))
2. Facts giving rise to these petitions, briefly stated, are that the Government of Punjab vide its letter dated 5th of December, 1975 had accorded sanction to the sale of the state land measuring 696 kanals, 6 marlas in favour of the Municipal Committee, Toba Tek Singh at the rate of Rs. 20,000/- per acre for the development of a Housing Scheme and regularization of Kachi Abadis. Finally, however, the land measuring 293 kanals, 15 marlas has been sold/transferred to the respondent-Municipal Committee for the construction/development of a housing colony for low income people and a mutation has since been sanctioned in its favour. The said land, it is stated, is being utilized for a housing colony known as Jinnah Colony No.2 Case of the petitioners by and large is that they were given small plots of land in the said colony and they have built the houses/structures thereon which the respondents particularly the Colony Assistant, Toba Tek Singh and Municipal Committee, Toba Tek Singh were threatening to demolish so as to dispossess them from the plots. Some of the petitioners have based their claim on the Resolutions passed in their favour by the Municipal Committee approving their request for allotment of plots.
Others have pleaded that under the direction of the Chairman of the Municipal Committee, they have deposited Rs. 101/- each as security refundable to them in case they were not allotted the plots applied for by them. Feeling aggrieved with the threatened action of the respondents, petitioners have invoked constitutional jurisdiction of this Court to have it declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect.
3. Municipal Committee, Toba Tek Singh in its parawise comments/written statements has repudiated the petitioners assertion and stated that no allotment of any plots has been made to the petitioners nor possession thereof delivered to them. According to the Municipal Committee, the petitioners who claim to have entered into possession of some pieces of land in the aforesaid housing colony and raised construction thereon were encroachers and unauthorised occupants and the Municipal Committee was within its rights to demolish their un-authorised constructions and to dispossess them from the plots in their occupation. It is pointed out by the Municipal Committee that the number of deserving/entitled persons is very large while the plots are in small number. The allotments shall, therefore, be made by ballotting/drawing of lots. Municipal Committee has, however, admitted in the comments/written statements that it had passed the resolutions approving the request of some of the petitioners for the allotment of plots but it has been clarified that the resolutions only determined their entitlement and allotment orders containing the terms and conditions thereof have yet to be issued. It has also been accepted in the comments that some of the petitioners had submitted applications for the allotment of plots accompanied by a security deposit of Rs.100/-. It has been explained that the number of such applications runs into thousands. Town Planning Officer present in Court stated that as many as 7828 persons including some of the petitioners had deposited Rs. 101/-.
4. After some arguments, learned Advocate-General and the Learned counsel for the respondent-Municipal Committee agreed that the Municipal Committee shall honour its Resolutions and allot the plots in Jinnah Colony No.2 to those petitioners in whose favour Resolutions were passed accepting their requests for allotment of plots subject, however, to any adjustments that may ^ave to be made in the location/situation of the plots keeping in view the site development plan of the colony. This was accepted by the learned counsel for the petitioners.
It may be stated that the petitioners in Writ Petition Nos. 10062-91, 11247-91, 11255-91, 546-92, 547-92, 1111-92, 2312-92, 2313-92, 3228-92, 3230-92, 5173-92, 10020-92, 10021-92 and 11757-92 based their claim on the Resolutions passed in their favour by the Municipal Committee. Town Planning Officer, however, pointed out that the Resolutions in favour of the petitioners in Writ Petition Nos. 10062-91, 5173-92 and 11757-92 have been suspended/cancelled/quashed. This fact is not controverted by the learned counsel for the petitioners. In the circumstances, the petitioners in these three petitions will not be entitled to the allotment of the plots on the basis of the aforementioned concession/agreement of the Learned counsel for the respondents. They may, however, seek appropriate remedy against the cancellation/quashment of the Resolutions in question.
5. As regards the petitioners in the remaining writ petitions, learned Advocate-General suggested that their cases may be referred to a- committee consisting of the following:-
1. The Deputy Commissioner, Toba Tek Singh or his nominee.
2. Sitting President of the District Bar Association, Toba Tek Singh.
3. Member, Punjab Bar Council from District Toba Tek Singh.
4. Town Planning Officer, Municipal Committee, Toba Tek Singh.
Which Committee shall look into each individual case on merits, determine the entitlement of each petitioner keeping in view all the relevant factors including the nature and length of his possession and the fact whether he/she is shelterless and does not own any residential accommodation elsewhere in Pakistan and those found deserving arid entitled shall be allotted the plots in the Colony. The suggestion/proposal of the learned Advocate-General has been affirmed/accepted by the learned counsel for the petitioners as also the learned counsel appearing for the Municipal Committee and by the Town Planning Officer of the Municipal Committee.
5. In view of the position afore-stated, all the writ petitions are disposed of with the agreement of the learned counsel for the parties in the following terms:- Municipal Committee, Toba Tek Singh shall honour its own resolution passed in favour of the petitioners in Writ Petitions No. 11247-91, 11255-91, 546-92, 547-92, 1111-92, 2312-92, 3228-92, 3230- 92, 10020-92, 10021-92 and 2313-92 and allot to them the area equivalent to that mentioned in the Resolutions subject, of course, to any adjustments in the location/situation of the plots which may be necessary in view of the site development plan of the Colony.
Petitioners in Writ Petitions No. 10062-91, 5173-92 and 11757-92 are not entitled to the allotment of any plots on the basis of the resolutions as the same are stated to have been suspended/cancelled/quashed. They may, however, seek appropriate remedy against the suspension/quashment of the resolutions.
Cases of the remaining petitioners shall be examined by a Committee comprising Deputy Commissioner, Toba Tek Singh or his nominee, Sitting President of the District Bar Association, Toba Tek Singh, member, Punjab Bar Council from District Toba Tek Singh and the Town Planning Officer, Municipal Committee, Toba Tek Singh and those found deserving and entitled by the Committee shall be allotted the plots in the Colony. No order as to costs. Copy of this order be sent to the Deputy Commissioner, Toba Tek Singh who will take necessary steps to ensure compliance therewith.