' This revision petition has been filed against the order dated 12-6-1975 of the Additional Commissioner (Revenue), Multan by which he rejected the appeal of the petitioner and upheld the order dated 3-6-1969 of the Collector, Multan.
2. Brief facts are that the petitioner and the respondents are real brothers and sister. Their father Naseer Khan was enlisted as Member of the Co-operative Farming Society of Chak No, 160/WB and was allotted 12-1/2 acres of land in dispute, He nominated Azam Khan respondent as his nominee on 4-12-1957. Naseer Khan died on 16-6-1962 and the tenancy passed on to his nominee Azam Khan, who is in possession of the lot since then. On 3-6-1969 Azam Khan, respondent was declared eligible for obtaining proprietary rights and he deposited the entire sale price. Muhammad Afzal petitioner filed an appeal against this order on the ground that the inheritance of the land should devolve upon all the legal heirs of Naseer Khan deceased. The Additional Commissioner held that since Naseer Khan had died before obtaining proprietary rights there was nothing wrong in granting these rights to his nominee. He, therefore, rejected the appeal under his order dated 12-6- 1975. Hence this revision petition.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at length. The moot point in this case is whether the tenancy is heritable under the Shariat law and section 19-A of the Colonization of Government Lands Act, 1912 will apply or whether the inheritance will devolve only on the nominee of the deceased allottee. I have gone through the relevant law and also examined the Bye-Laws of the Co-operative Farming Society. Clause 8 of the Cooperative Farming Society lays down that holding of a member as well as his share and other interest in the society shall only be inherited by his eldest son and that when a member has no male issue, he shall nominate a person to succeed him in the event of his death. In the present case the deceased Naseer Khan had nominated his younger son Azam Khan respondent as his nominee on 4-12-1957 nearly 5 years before his death.
This nomination was never challenged by the petitioner.
' On 3-6-1969 Azam Khan respondent was declared eligible by the Collector to obtain proprietary rights and he deposited the entire sale price. This again was never challenged by the petitioner in any higher Court. Since the deceased Naseer Khan had not obtained proprietary rights before his death, section 19-A of the Colonization of Government Lands Act 1912 will not apply in this case. In view of this position I see nothing wrong in the impugned order and dismiss the revision petition.