RAZA ALI, MEMBER.- These two revision petitions have been preferred against the order dated 12.6.1993, whereby the Commissioner, Sargodha Division rejected the appeals of the Petitioners with his single order.
2. Brief facts of the esc are that some land of Azim Khan deceased predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners in ROR No. 2020/93 and that of Hassan Khan deceased predecessor-in-interest of the Petitioners in R.O.R. No. 2021/93 was acquired for Chashma Barrage and WAPDA (Chashma Barrage Authorities) issued entitlement certificate Nos. 25 and 26 respectively for allotment of alternate land under the Chashma Barrage Oustees Scheme. On reverification of the said certificate, the District Collector, Mianwali vide his order dated 5.4.1993, cancelled both the certificates, for the reason that the land (sailaba) acquired from them was less that the required extent of I6 Kanals.
As both the affecters had earlier died, their legal heirs i.e. The petitioners in both the cases preferred separate appeals before the Commissioner, Sargodha Division, who rejected the same with his single order dated 12.6.1993. Hence these two revision petitions, which are being disposed of with this single order.
3. I have heard preliminary arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners in both the cases and have perused the relevant record available in these files.
4. As both the affecters Azim Khan and Hassan Khan predecessors-in- interest of the petitioners in these cases had already died, the District Collector was bound to hear their legal heirs before cancelling the entitlement certificates. Without going into the merits and demerits of the case, I hold that order of the District Collector suffers with legal infirmity.
5. In view of the above observations, I have no option but to set aside the orders of the lower Courts and remand the cases to the District Collector, Mianwali who should decide the same afresh after hearing the petitioners and after thorough scrutiny of the record.