1. ' SAIDUZZAMAN SIDDIQUI, J.---The petitioners are seeking leave to appeal against the judgment of a learned Judge in Chambers of Lahore High Court Bahawalpur Bench dated 26-5-1993.
2. ' The relevant facts of the case are that one Muhammad Iqbal, a claimant displaced person predecessor of the petitioners, submitted his claim forms Nos. 137, 138 and 139 in respect of agricultural land. These claim forms after verification were sent to district Lyallpur (Faisalabad) for allotment of land. Subsequently, land was allotted to Said Muhammad Iqbal, on transfer of his above claim, in Mauza Hotwala, Tehsil Bahawalpur, on 7th May 1959. The private respondents through their Attorney Muhammad Ghufran filed a Mukhabari application against Muhammad Iqbal alleging that the allotment was secured by said Muhammad lqbal against his duplicate claim forms. The Mukhabari application was aken up by the Additional Settlement Commissioner and finally by order dated 5.8-1965 the allotment of Muhammad Iqbal was cancelled. Muhammad Iqbal filed an application for review of the order dated 5-8-1965 and contended that no land was allotted to him on the duplicate claim forms. The Additional Settlement Commissioner by order dated 29-1.1966 accepted the review application and set aside his earlier order dated 5-8-1965.
3. The respondents filed Writ Petition No, 1245-R of 1966 against the order dated 29.1-1966 before the High Court which was allowed by order dated 27-3-1972 and the case was remanded to the Additional Settlement Commissioner for rehearing of the application of Muhammad Iqbal for setting aside ex parte order dated 5-8-1965. Muhammad Iqbal feeling aggrieved by certain observations made by the learned Single Judge in his order dated 27.3-1972 filed L.P.A. No, 75 of 1972 which was disposed of by a Division Bench of Lahore High Court on 14-4-1972 with the observations that the Additional Settlement Commissioner while deciding the case will not be influenced by the observations of learned Single Ridge made in his order dated 27-3-1971 On remand, the Additional Settlement Commissioner, by his order dated 22-7-1972 held that Muhammad Iqbal had not obtained any allotment on duplicate entitlement certificate and accordingly restored his allotment. The private respondents again filed appeal before the Settlement Commissioner Bahawalpur, who rejected the appeal by order dated 1-1-1974. The private respondents once again filed Writ Petition No, 8-R of 1974 which was accepted by a learned Single Judge of Lahore High Court by order dated 12-1-1975, and the case was remanded with the direction that the review application filed by Muhammad Iqbal against the order dated 5-8-1965 shall be deemed to be pending and the same will be heard by the Additional Settlement Commissioner after giving full opportunity to the parties. The Settlement Commissioner Bahawalpur through judgment dated 31-5-1976 rejected the review application filed by Muhammad Iqbal and cancelled his allotment which led to the filing of Writ Petition No, 117-R of 1978 by the petitioners which was dismissed by the learned Judge in Chambers through the impugned judgment. The learned Judge in chambers came to the conclusion that the respondents had a preferential right for settlement of their claims on the land as they were sitting allottees and their claim was also pending in the district.
4. ' In seeking leave to appeal, the learned counsel for the petitioners ' contended before us that the respondents' claim was solely based on Mukhabari application and as such the question of any preferential right of the respondents for allotment of the land in question did not arise. It is also contended by the learned counsel that the land was settled finally in favour of the predecessor-in- interest of the petitioners Muhammad Iqbal deceased in 1959 and at that time no claim of respondents in respect of this land was pending in the area. The land having been finally allotted to petitioners' predecessor against his verified claim and there being no allotment in his favour against the duplicate claim form, there was no justification for cancelling the allotment of Muhammad Iqbal. The contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners requires examination and we, accordingly, grant leave to appeal to consider the same.