MALIK MUHAMMAD QAYYUM, J.- This judgment shall dispose of W.P.Nos. 1209/86, 281/87, 322/87, 353/87 1415/88, 6607/88, 2237/89,6573/90, 4261/91, 4389/91, 6948/91, 7735/91 and 7756/91 in which common questions of law fall for determination.
2. The petitioners in all these petitions are owners of different portions of land situate in the revenue estate of Dhana Singh Wala, Tehsil & District, Lahore. On 15th October, 1979, the Collector, Lahore District issued a notification that the land measuring 781 Kanals 3 Marlas was likely to be acquired for a public purpose namely construction of residential accommodation for Central Government Employees at Lahore. This notification was published in the Punjab Gazette (Extraordinary) on 17th October, 1979. The land belonging to the petitioners is included in the aforesaid area. On lst June, 1980, by a corrigendum, an area measuring 84 kanals 8 marlas was deleted from the earlier notification. This was followed by another notification dated 25th July, 1981 which was published in the Punjab Gazette on 16th August, 1981 whereby an area measuring 347 kanals 3 marlas was deleted and another area of 42 kanals 10 marlas was added to the aforesaid notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
3. It appears that no substantial progress was made till 6th April, 1983 when a notification under Section 17 (4) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was issued by the Commissioner, directing that the provisions of Sections 5 and 5-A shall not apply to the acquisition in question. This notification was followed by another notification dated 6th April, 1985 in which the declaration required by Sections 6 & 7 of the Act was made and Executive Engineer, Central Civil Division was directed to take order for acquisition of the said land.
4. In these constitutional petitions, the said notifications and the proceedings for acquisition have been challenged by the petitioners on various grounds.
5. The main contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that as the proceedings for acquisition were not completed within one year and 60 days of the issuance of notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the aforesaid notification has ceased to be operative and no further proceedings could be taken thereafter. In support of this contention, learned counsel have relied upon instructions issued by the Government of West Pakistan, Revenue Department on 15th June, 1968 and rule 7 of the Punjab Land Acquisition Rules, 1983.
6. Mr. Farooq Bedar, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for Provincial Government as also Mr. Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, Learned Deputy Attorney General for Pakistan have been heard.
7. The contention raised by the Learned counsel for the petitioners has force. Rule 7 of the Punjab Land Acquisition Rules, 1983 reads as under:- "Where the land is to be acquired for a public purpose the Commissioner shall issue a notification under section 5 of the Act not later than one year from the date of the publication of the Notification under section 4. If no notification is issued under section 5 within the period specified in this rule, the Commissioner shall immediately report the matter to the Board of Revenue for extension in the and the Board of Revenue may, in its discretion, extend the the for the issue of a Notification under section 5, which shall not be more than 60 days. If the Board of Revenue declines to grant the extension applied for or if the Commissioner fails to issue a Notification under section 5 within the extended period, the acquisition proceedings shall be deemed to have come to an end.
However, any the spent in the prosecution of a judicial remedy shall stand excluded from the period of litigation".
Even before the promulgation of the rules, the Provincial Government vide its memorandum dated 15th June, 1968 had issued instructions to the similar effect, the relevant paragraph of which reads as follows:- "Attention is invited to the decision taken in item 2 (i) of the Commissioners' Conference held in the Board of Revenue, West Pakistan, Lahore, on the 16th June, 1966. You are requested to please ensure that if no action is taken by the Acquiring Department/Agencies within one year of the issue of notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, it should be withdrawn and the Departments/agencies concerned informed accordingly".
6. The question as to what is the effect of failure to issue notification under section 5 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 within period of one year was considered by this Court in various cases, inter alia, Khawaja Zubair Ahmad and others V. Collector and others (1990 MLD 1941), Nazarul Hussain V.
The Collector Lahore District, Lahore and 5 others (PLD 1990 Lahore 472) and Qudrat Ullah and 4 others V. Government of West Pakistan through Collector, Lyallpur and 4 others (1992 CLC 680). It was held that if notification under section 5 or under section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was not issued within one year or at the most one year and 60 days of the issuance of the notification under Section 4, the proceedings for acquisition are deemed to have come to an end and thereafter no proceedings could be taken nor could any notification under section 17-B be issued on the basis of such a notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act which has lapsed.
The view taken in Kh. Zubair Ahmad's case supra, was cited with approval by the Division Bench of this Court in Cantonment Executive Officer, M.E., Section Cantonment Board, Bahawalpur Vs. Syed Iqbal Mustafa and 2 others (1993 CLC 1489). It may be pointed out that the same view was taken by this Court in W.P. 7459/90 which was decided on 26.6.1991. A petition for leave to appeal against the aforesaid judgment was fiIed before the Supreme Court of Pakistan but the same was dismissed.
7. It follows from the above discussion that as admittedly no notification either under section 5 or under section 17 of the Act was issued within one year and two months of the notification under section 4 dated 15th October, 1979, the proceedings for acquisition came to an end on the expiry of the said period and the subsequent notifications under section 17 and the declaration made on 6.4.1983 and 6.4.1985 under sections 6 and 7 of the Land Acquisition Act are clearly void and without jurisdiction.
As a result of what has been stated above, all these petitions are allowed with no order as to costs.