The petitioner claims proprietary rights in respect of land measuring 106 Kanals, 2 Marlas in Chak No.753/GB, Tehsil Kamalia, District Toba Tek Singh in pursuance of Notification dated 3-9-1979.
2. The disputed land was allotted to one Nazir Ahmad under five years scheme but as he could not cultivate the same he was refused proprietary rights.
3. Op 8-11-1988 petitioner applied for the transfer of this land under Para 13(4) of the aforementioned notification dated 3-9-1979 on the ground of being sub-tenant. This application was rejected by the Collector vide his order dated 12-12-1989 holding that the petitioner commenced the cultivation from Kharif, 1979 and further that the application was also not filed within time. It was further stated in this order that according to the instructions of the Board of Revenue the cultivation must be prior to Kharif 1977.
4. The petitioner filed an appeal and revision petition which were rejected vide orders dated 14-4- 1990 and 26-5-1991 of the Additional Commissioner, Faisalabad and Member (Colonies) respectively. The petitioner has assailed all the three orders in this writ petition.
5. The case of the petitioner has been rejected mainly on the ground that his cultivation is not prior to Kharif, 1977. This is so laid down in para 3 of the Notification, dated 3rd of September, 1979 relating to the eligibility of a particular person. There is a concurrent finding of fact by all the three t Tribunals that the case of the petitioner does not come within the ambit of the aforementioned notification and, therefore, he cannot claim proprietary rights in the land in question. It is held by the Member, Board of Revenue that the case of the petitioner, a sub-tenant, cannot be superior to those who are in possession of land as regular lessees. In these circumstances the petitioner was rightly refused proprietary rights in the land in pursuance of Notification, dated 3rd September, 1979.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to show any provision in the notification entitling the petitioner to claim the transfer of the land in dispute nor has he been able to point out any illegality in the orders passed in this case. The order dated 26-5-1991 of the Member (Colonies) maintaining the orders of the Collector and the Additional Commissioner is in accordance with law.
No case has been made out for any interference.
In view of above this writ petition is dismissed in limine.