' MALIK MUHAMMAD QAYYUM, J.--- This is a petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan calling in question the order of the Deputy Land Commissioner, dated 27-6- 1992 whereby the petitioners' application objecting to the jurisdiction of the Land Reforms Authorities to proceed further was dismissed.
2. The circumstances in which this dispute has arisen are that an area of 2271 Kanals and 18 Marlas situate in Village Papa Khorana, Tehsil and District Multan was gifted in lieu of dower to petitioner No,1 by her husband, Muhammad Sharif Khakwani. The transaction was given effect to in the Revenue Record vide mutation No,2, dated 4-1-1972.
3. On the promulgation of the Land Reforms Regulation, 1972 M.L.R. 115 of 1972 a dispute arose as to whether the gift in favour of petitioner No,1 and the subsequent mutation attested on 4-1-1972 were legal and valid. It is not necessary for the present purposes to fully detail the litigation which ensued thereafter.. Suffice it to say that the question as to whether the mutation was valid or not was finally decided by this Court in Writ Petition No,921 of 1982 on 15-6-1987.
4. According to the petitioner No,1, she had subsequently made a gift of 600 Kanals of the land in Village Palia Khorana in favour of her minor children who have been impleaded as petitioners Nos.2 and 3.
5. On promulgation of Land Reforms Act, 1977 the petitioners did not file any declaration. On a report made to him, the Deputy Land Commissioner issued a notice to petitioner No,1 Mst. Azra Parveen for determining her holdings under section 7(5) of the Land Reforms Act, 1977. Various notices were sent to her out of whom one notice was served on her on 3-10-1989.
6. During the course of proceedings before the Deputy Land Commissioner an application was filed by the petitioner objecting to the assumption of jurisdiction by him and continuance of the proceedings on the premises that the provisions of the Land Reforms Act have been declared to be unlslamic by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in Qazalbash Waqf and others v., Chief Land Commissioner Punjab, Lahore and others PLD 1990 SC 99 which decision was to come into effect on 23 3-1990. The application having been dismissed by the Deputy Land Commissioner on 27-6-1992, the petitioners have now approached this Court by filing this petition.
7. Ch. Khurshid Ahmad, learned counsel for the petitioners has argued with vehemence that as the provisions of the Land Reforms Act, 1977 have been declared as contrary to the injunctions of Islam there was no jurisdiction vested in the Deputy Land Commissioner to proceed further in the matter.
8. No one has appeared on behalf of the respondents who are proceeded against ex parte.
9. After having given our due consideration to the facts of the case and the law applicable we are of the view that this petition has no force and the Deputy Land Commissioner was justified in dismissing the petitioner's application whereby they had objected to the continuance of the proceedings. It is true and undeniable that the Supreme Court of Pakistan in Qazalbash Waqf's case held certain provisions of the Land Reforms Act, 1977 to be violative of the Injunctions of Islam as ordained by Holy Qur'an and Sunnah and that judgment came into force on 23-3-1990 but the question arises as to the effect of the declaration of law as unIslamic in the matters pending at that time or thereafter. The answer to this question is to be found in the same judgment wherein Muhammad Afzal Zullah, J. (as he then was) opined as under:-- "However, I am of the view that the decision of this Court shall not affect those cases in which any decisive step has been or is now taken in the ordinary normal course at any stage of the proceedings, in implementation of the provisions which would cease to have effect as a result of the Court order, prior to the date to be fixed therein."
' Again in the same judgment Shafi-ur-Rahman, J. (as he then was) made the following observations:-- "As most of the provisions found repugnant to Islam happen to be self-executory, they have of their own force taken effect, accomplished the object of the legislation leaving the mere implementation of it, to be completed on the strength of machinary previsions. Such self-executor provisions will remain unaffected by this decision."
10. In view of the above dictum, it becomes necessary to determine as to whether in the present case any decisive step had been taken before 23-3-1990 when the judgment of the Supreme Court was to become effective. On the basis of the record, it cannot be denied that much earlier to the aforesaid date i,e, on 2-104989 petitioner No,1 had been served with a notice in terms of section 7(5) of the Punjab Land Reforms Act, 1977 calling upon her to show cause as to why her holding may not be determined and the excess land resumed. These proceedings were admittedly pending on 23-3-1990 and a decisive step by the issuance of notice under section 7(5) of the Land Reforms Act, 1977 had already been taken. That being so, the case against the petitioner was not hit by the law declared by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in Qazalbash Waqf's case. Reference in this connection may also be made to Chief Land Commissioner, Punjab and others v. Chief Administrator of Auqaf Punjab and others in which the same principle was reiterated and it was held that in cases where a decisive step has been taken before 23-3-1990 would not be hit by declaration of law in Qazalbash Waqf's case supra.
' As a result of what has been stated above, this petition has no force and is dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs.