BASHARAT AHMAD SHAIKH, J.--- This appeal is in culmination of second round of litigation between the parties. It relates to allotment of Plot No. 188 in Housing Scheme, Kotli. The High Court has accepted a writ petition filed by respondent Muhammad Siddique Raza and has directed a fresh decision by the Government after hearing the parties.
2. The allotment in the said Housing Scheme is governed by a set of rules known as "the Rawalakot and Kotli Housing Schemes Regulations" made on 11 th of July, 1994. These Regulations were framed under section 16 of the Housing Schemes at Rawalakot and Kotli Act, 1985. Under Regulation No.23 ten per cent. Of the plots are reserved for allotment by the Government. In the year 1991 one plot became available for allotment in the Government quota but the Prime Minister passed orders on seven different applications sanctioning plots in favour of the applicants. This situation was brought to the notice of the Prime Minister who approved allotment in favour of Sardar Bahar Khan, the present appellant. However, a few days later another direction was issued by the Prime Minister that plot may be allotted to Muhammad Siddique Raza, respondent. The file was again submitted to the Prime Minister to bring to his attention the fact that he had already allotted the plot to Sardar Bahar Khan. This time the Prime Minister passed a direction that the plot may be allotted to Muhammad Siddique Raza. It is stated that the Prime Minister subsequently, issued an order directing the Allotment Committee to maintain status quo. It is also stated that Sardar Bahar Khan approached the Prime Minister by filing a review petition that previous order by which the plot was allotted to him could not be cancelled without hearing him. At this stage, in 1992, respondent Muhammad Shafique Raza filed a writ petition in the High Court in which he averred that the plot in dispute was allotted to him and that he had deposited the price of the plot after which an allotment order was duly issued to him but possession was not delivered to him. In the writ petition he impleaded the Chairman and Secretary of the Allotment Committee for Housing Schemes and alleged that they were about to cancel the allotment of the plot with mala fide intention and without lawful authority. He sought a direction that the aforementioned functionaries may be directed to hand over possession of the plot to him. Sardar Bahar Khan, who was not impleaded as a party, subsequently became a party on his own request. The Chairman and Secretary of the Allotment Committee accepted the contention raised in the writ petition that they had no power to grant or cancel the plot in dispute as it was from the quota reserved for the Government. They submitted that the record of the case had been submitted to the Prime Minister, and it was for the parties to establish their case before the Prime Minister. The High Court accepted the writ petition on 2nd of August, 1993 and held that the allotment in favour of Muhammad Siddique Raza was final. A direction was issued against the Chairman and Secretary of the Allotment C6mmittee to refrain from cancelling the disputed plot. On an appeal filed by Sardar Bahar Khan, with leave of the Court, this Court set aside the order passed by the High Court. This Court accepted an objection that the order passed by the High Court was not sustainable in view of the fact that the Government was not arrayed as a respondent in the case and findings that the allotment in favour of Muhammad Siddique Raza had become final and that the plot could not be cancelled from his name could not be recorded without impleading the Government as a party. It was further observed that the allotments made by the Government were formally issued by the Allotment Committee but even the Committee was not made a party in the writ petition. The judgment was announced on 30th of November, 1994.
3. On 13th of June, 1995 Estate Officer/Secretary Allotment Committee, Housing Scheme, Kotli issued an allotment order in respect of plot in dispute in favour of Sardar Bahar Khan. This order was challenged by respondent Muhammad Siddique Khan by filing a writ petition on 25th of June, 1995 which was subsequently amended with permission of the High Court. The writ petition has been accepted on the ground that the plot in dispute had been previously allotted to Muhammad Siddique Raza and has now been allotted to Sardar Bahar Khan, but Government did not give an opportunity of hearing to Muhammad Siddique Raza and the principle of law that nobody can be condemned unheard has been violated. The High Court has also observed that although an allotment order has been issued in favour of Sardar Bahar Khan but the allotment in favour of Muhammad Siddique Raza has not been expressly cancelled. It has further been observed by the High Court that there are some mixed questions of fact and law which should have been determined by the Government after conducting proper inquiry.
4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we have gone through the record and find that before deciding the dispute about allotment of Plot No. 188 parties were not given a hearing. As already noted different orders have been passed about the allotment of the plot in dispute from time to time. At one A State the plot was allotted to the appellant while at a subsequent stage it was allotted to 'the respondent. In these circumstances we do not find any fault in the view taken by .The High Court that before passing an adverse order against him respondent Muhammad Siddique should have been given a hearing so that he could present his case before the final determination. Mr. Muhammad Ayub A Sabir, the learned counsel for the appellant, has not been able to show that in the circumstances of the case a hearing was not necessary. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.