This Constitutional petition is filed to challenge the order passed by respondent No. 3.
2. The facts as stated in the petition are that Plots Nos.7-A, 7-B, 15-A, 15-B and 15-C, measuring one Kanal each, situate in Hamidpur Hamlet, Tehsil Mirpur, were allotted in favour of the petitioners on April, 3, 1990 by respondents. After the allotments, possession of the respective plots was also handed over to the petitioners. The above allotments were cancelled by a Government Notification but in a subsequent order, the same were restored. However, a Revising Authority was constituted to scrutinize the allotments made by the respondents, including the allotments made in favour of the petitioners. The Revising Authority so constituted under the M.D.A. Act, 1974, cancelled the allotments from the name of the petitioners. This writ petition has been filed to challenge the aforesaid order.
3. Mr. Muhammad Yunus Arvi, the learned counsel for the petitioners has raised the following points in support of the writ petition: --
(i) That the order of Revising Authority is illegal, without jurisdiction and lawful authority;
(ii) that the Revising Authority did not apply its mind and without pointing out any illegality, whatsoever, in the allotments, cancelled the same;
(iii) that the Revising Authority in its order mentioned above, the plots in dispute were left for '
Eidgah' which is not within its jurisdiction;
(iv) that the Revising Authority failed to appreciate that the plots in dispute are in possession of the petitioners since their allotments.
4. Controverting the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Masud Khalid representing the respondents argued that the Revising Authority after taking into consideration all aspects, legal as well factual, cancelled the allotments from the name of the petitioners and held the plots to be left for ' Eidgah'. It was also argued that initially the plots were marked for ' Eidgah' and therefore, their allotments in favour of the petitioners were illegal which was rightly noticed by the Revising Authority.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the record. The allotment in favour of the petitioners was admittedly made on April 3, 1990, by respondent No.2. The above allotment along with the other allotments made during the period from 14-12-1988 to 8-7-1990, were cancelled by a Government Notification issued under No.Rabita/1651-1751 dated 25-11-1990.
The abovementioned order was, however, withdrawn by the Government vide its Order No. Works/1380-1480 dated 3-10-1992. Consequently, the allotments were restored. It was also provided in the order that the Revising Authority shall be constituted to scrutinize the allotments. The allotments in dispute came under consideration of the Revising Authority which cancelled the same. It may also be mentioned that the area where the allotments in favour of the petitioners were made, initially was allotted for the ' Eidgah' in the Hamidpur Hamlet by the Allotment Committee, headed by Ch. Sohbat Ali on 20-12-1975, through an order No.AC-309/76. These allotments along with the other allotments, were cancelled by the Government through a Notification No.Rabita-77/MDA/14/1762-1774, dated 16-12-1980. The allotments cancelled through the above notification were regulated by a special regulation framed by the M.D.A., under section 47 of the M.D.A. Act, wherein it was provided that the persons or the allottees from whose name the allotments were cancelled, may apply fresh within the stipulated period provided for it. It may also be mentioned that none applied under the above Regulation for re-allotment of the plots cancelled from the name of ' Eidgah'.
6. The Notification mentioned above was issued on October 3, 1992, whereby order cancelling the allotments, was withdrawn and a Revising Authority was constituted to scrutinize the allotments.
The relevant portion of the Notification is reproduced: -- A perusal of the impugned order, Annexure 'A', passed by respondent No.3, the Revising Authority, reveals that the above-referred authority failed to point out any illegality or any other reason for failing to revise the allotments in favour of the petitioners which was essentially required. The order disclosed that the above area was allotted by the Revising Authority in the name of ' Eidgah' which was not within its jurisdiction. The Revising Authority is only competent to pass any suitable order with regard to allotments under consideration. The retaining of allotments or cancellation of allotments from the name of the petitioners was not supported by any reason, whatsoever. It may also be mentioned that the entitlement of the allottees has been accepted by the Revising Authority as held by it that the allottees may get the allotments in some other place. It follows that the Revising Authority failed to exercise its jurisdiction vested in it under law. The Revising Authority has to keep in view the mandate of law provided in the notification, particularly in the background of order for withdrawal of cancellation of allotments made earlier by the Government. Failing thereof has caused miscarriage of justice, damaging the petitioners' right without ascribing any reason, as such, the excess of jurisdiction of the above authority is noticed. This Court in exercise of its extraordinary Constitutional jurisdiction, is competent to correct any illegality or error noticed by it, committed by any tribunal or Court subordinate to it.
7. In view of the above State of facts and law the impugned order of Revising Authority is not maintainable which is hereby set aside and in consequence, the allotments in favour of the petitioners are declared to be valid and shall be deemed to be intact, by accepting the writ petition.