' The facts of the cases, as they can be gathered from the contents of this petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 briefly put are that one Rehman son of Allah Bakhsh was refugee from India. He was allotted and confirmed an area of land measuring 37 Kanals and 6 Marlas in village Ajodhiapur, Tehsil and District Lahore. He died on 9-11-1971 and a mutation of his inheritance No,2011 was attested in favour of his sons Maula Bakhsh and Jabbar Din on 3-6-1978 and their names were duly incorporated in the jamabandi. Both of them allegedly sold their shares to the present petitioner Abdul Bari Khan through sale deeds.Dated 2-1-1978 registered on 24-1-1978 and mutations in respect thereof bearing Nos. 2024 and 2025 were attested on 3-6- 1978. The Lahore Development Authority, however, acquired land for the scheme known as Muhammad Ali Jauhar Town Scheme including this land measuring 37 Kanals and 6 Marlas purchased by Abdul Bari Khan, petitioner No,1 from the aforesaid two brothers. Before this land was so acquired, petitioner No,1 had allegedly sold certain pieces thereof to various persons including Aniqa Mushtaq, petitioner No,2 and Faiqa Mushtaq, petitioner No,3 and he was left with a holding of 17 Kanals and 10 Marlas. The Land Acquisition Collector Lahore Development Authority gave his award on 9-10-1982 whereby he held that Abdul Bari Khan, petitioner No,1 was the owner of 34 Kanals and 7 Marlas of land, out of which he had sold 16 Kanals and 17 Marlas to various persons while he was left with 17 Kanals and 10 Marlas. A certified copy of this award has been filed by the petitioner was Annexure E'. Subsequently vide list of exemptions prepared by the L.D.A., petitioner No,1 was allotted Plots Nos. 76,77, 78, 90, and 91 each measuring 1 Kanal and Plot No,420 measuring 5 Marlas while petitioner No,2 was allotted Plot No,80 and petitioner No,3 was allotted Plot No,73, both measuring 1 Kanal each, as per Annexures 'G', 'H' and ' I'. The entire development charges were paid by these petitioners in the year 1988. However, the petitioner learnt that mutation Nos.2024 and 2025 had not been duly incorporated in the Revenue Record. He, therefore, moved the authorities concerned and finally the District Collector order the preparation of Musannas (duplicates) of these mutations which was accordingly done on 18-7-1992. Meanwhile. However, the Director Land Development L.D.A. Passed an order on 6-1-1991 to the effect that this land belonged to Maula Bakhsh deceased and his brother Jabbar Din, as per the Revenue Record and the petitioner has nothing to do therewith. The Land Acquisition Collector, therefore, amended the award dated 9-10-1982 by deleting the name of Abdul Bari Khan therefrom and incorporating the names of Jabbar Din and his deceased brother Maula Bakhsh in his place. It so happened that Jabbar Din who is now arrayed as respondent No,5 also felt like bringing suit against the petitioners for declaration that the two deeds relied on by Abdul Bari Khan petitioner No,1 (Annexures ' A' and 'C') were the result of fraud and the two Mutations Nos.2024 and 2025 (Copies Annexures 'D' and 'B' respectively) were, therefore, liable to be set aside. This suit was, however, got dismissed by Jabbar Din himself who filed an application that it has been brought due to some misunderstanding with Abdul Bari Khan.
2. The petitioners have, therefore, now come to this Court praying that the amendment made in the award by the Land Acquisition Collector in view of the order of the Director Land Development, respondent No,2 dated 6-1-1991 be declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect and the District Collector Revenue, Lahore respondent No,4 be directed to incorporate the name of petitioner No,1 in the jamabandi on the basis of Musannas of mutations Nos.2024 and 2025, dated 18-7-1992 and finally that the L.D.A. Be directed to deliver the possession of the plots in question to the petitioners.
3. After the filing of this writ petition on 7-12-1992 pre-admission notices were directed to be issued in the names of respondents Nos. 1 and 4. The comments of respondent No,1 were received on 3-2- 1993 while those of respondent No,4 were received on 27-7-1994. The writ petition was admitted to regular hearing after these comments were considered, on 30-6-1996.
4. I have today heard the learned counsel for the parties at some considerable length. I find that as per the comments of the District Collector, respondent No,4 mutations Nos. 2024 and 2025 were entered and attested on the basis of the sale-deeds but they were not reflected in the Revenue Record and it was finally done on 18-7-1992. District Collector, therefore, prayed that the writ petition disposed of in light of these mutations both attested as early as 1978 in the name of Abdul Bari Khan, petitioner No,1 .
5. The learned Legal Advisor for the L.D.A. Has not been able to justify the impugned order dated 6- 1-1991 on the basis which the award was subsequently amended. Since the necessary correction has already Uaen made and the original award restored, the natural consequence would be that the order dated 6-1-1991 was without lawful authority and of no legal effect and that the petitioners were entitled to the possession of the plots in question.
5. This writ petition is accordingly accepted in the said terms and disposed of with no order as to costs.