The petitioners are aggrieved against order dated 23-7-1980 of the Additional Settlement Commissioner, Lahore, directing the holding of enquiry against the claim of Arura, predecessor-in- interest of the petitioners.
2. Briefly stated, that the claimant filed claim for the land abandoned in India and the same was verified for 103 Bighas, 7 Biswa s as against Claim No.5055 on 4-9-1955 and land allotted to him in Chak Hindu, District Gujranwala on 1st of February, 1956. Subsequently land measuring 65 Kanals, 19 Marlas was cancelled out of confirmed allotment of Arura resulting in W.P. 1562-R of 1966 which was accepted on 25-3-1975 and the case was remanded after hearing the claimant. There was also a direction to enquire if Arum had migrated to Pakistan.
3. Pursuant to the remand the Additional Settlement Commissioner with powers of .Chief Settlement Commissioner decided the case of 8-2-1977 holding that Arura was not a fictitious person and died in Pakistan leaving two sons, a daughter and a widow. This finding was arrived at on the basis of overwhelming evidence on record so mentioned in the order itself. This order was set aside at the instance of the respondents and the Additional Settlement Commissioner by his order dated 27-10-1977 directed that the case be decided after hearing the parties. Thereafter the petitioners filed a miscellaneous application questioning the order dated 27-10-1979 and the same was rejected by impugned order dated 23-7-1980 maintaining order dated 27-10-1977, the effect of which is that the case was to be decided afresh. This order dated 23-7-1980 is impugned in this writ petition.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that Arura migrated to Pakistan and had filed the claim genuinely and therefore, there is no reason to reopen this case. On 7-11-1992 it is argued on behalf of the respondents that the claim of Arura is bogus as he never migrated to Pakistan. At the same time learned counsel for the parties showed their anxiety that the litigation is pending since 1966 with so many murders on account of this land and it would be in the interest of justice to end the litigation.
5. It may be stated that initially the land allotted to the claimant was cancelled at the instance of respondent No.2 Rana Safdar Jang who claimed to be the allottee and thereafter he sold the same in favour of respondents 3to6.
6. From the above resume of the facts it is clear that the controversy between the parties centres round the point as to whether Arura migrated to Pakistan with a genuine claim or not. In view of this an order was passed on 7-11-1992 directing the OSD Record to appear in the case with the relevant record regarding the claim of Arura and in pursuance of this Ghulam Rasool son of Shahabuddian, Record Keeper, Central Record Office has appeared today alongwith the relevant record and has placed a chart duly signed by him and by the counsel for Settlement Department showing that Arura filed Claim No.5055 and the same was verified on 4-9-1955. I also recorded the statement to this effect in presence of learned counsel for the parties. According to this there cannot be two opinions that Arura claimant died in Pakistan after having filed Claim Form No.5055 duly verified by the Central Record to the extent of 103 Bighas, 7 Biswas in Mauza Alipur Had Bast No. 264, Tehsil and District Ambala. Faced with this situation the learned counsel for the respondents stated that the land was cancelled from the name of the claimant on 1-11-1965 and thereafter allotted to respondent No.2, who in turn sold the same in favour of other respondents. This contention of the learned counsel holds no water as the order dated 1-11-1965 was already cancelled in W.P. No. 1562-R/66 and by accepting the same remanded the case for fresh decision after hearing the parties. All proceedings thereafter contrary to the order passed by this Court, therefore, are without jurisdiction and the respondents cannot derive any benefit there from.
7. I would have remanded this case for re-decision but the litigation is pending since 1966 and in view of the anxiety of the parties to end the litigation record was summoned which certifies that the claimant migrated to Pakistan and filed a claim which was duly verified. After the remand of this case by this Court in W.P. No. 1562-R/66 the learned Additional Settlement Commissioner with powers of Chief Settlement Commissioner by his order dated 8-2-1977 also held in favour of Arura by referring to the documentary evidence on the record and this order of Chief Settlement Commissioner could not have been challenged before the Additional Settlement Commissioner.
Resultantly, there seems to be no justification for holding an enquiry into the entitlement of Arura as directed by the impugned order dated 23-7-1980. The writ petition is accepted with no order as to costs.