1. CORNELIUS, C. J.-This petition raises inter alia a question similar to that which arose and was decided in the case of Farooq Imam (PLD 1965 SC 585) The Claims Commissioner, on the 27 December 1963, acting on information, and seemingly after consultation with the Director of enforcement, reduced very sub--stantially the extent of the claim of the petitioners, in respect of property abandoned in India, which had been duly examined and verified by a Claims Officer on the 14th June 1958, more than five years before. The action was in suo motu revision, for which at the time, the prescribed limitation was 90 days, but there was a proviso that the Claims Commissioner could act without limit of time, if he thought fit so to do.
2. We accordingly grant leave to appeal. The hearing will be expedited, and may proceed on the basis of the paper-book of the petitioner, unless the Claims Commissioner has documents other than his final order to show that he acted after considering the circumstances and recording a decision that he thought it fit to interfere, despite expiry of the prescribed period of limitation.
3. Security Rs. 1,000. 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.