SAEED-UR-REHMAN FARRUKH, J. - Brief facts leading to this writ petition are; the petitioner is an oustee from Gujranwala, the land of the father of the petitioner having been acquired by the Government of the Punjab for utilization by Gujranwala Cantonment Board.
The petitioner applied to the authorities for issuance of eligibility certificate and ultimately on 15.3.1987, certificate No. 1570, was issued vide No. 211 /RS in the name of the petitioner to the extent of 7/8 share and l/8th share of his mother Mst. Fazian alias Mst. Fazal Bibi by the Deputy Commissioner. Resettlement Officer, Gujranwala. Mst. Fazal Bibi has since died and not the petitioner is the only holder of the aforementioned eligibility certificate vide decree dated 30.4.1998.
2. The petitioner appeared before, respondent No. 2 alongwith his mother for allotment of land measuring as acres, 4 kanals in terms of eligibility certificate but no action was taken upon it till 1990 when he was informed that by virtue of letter No. UO/3477-90/3077-CL, dated 2.12.1990, issued by the Secretary Colonies that ban for allotment of state land under the eligibility certificates has been imposed by the Government. Feeling aggrieved the petitioner filed writ petition in this Court (W.P. 5363/98). Few other writ petitions on the same subject were also filed by persons similarly placed by the petitioner. These writ petitions were accepted/disposed of by holding that imposition of ban was unlawful and against the rights of the various Oustees. Reference may be made to writ petitions No. 985/91, writ petition No. 6349/94 and writ petition No. 10433/94.
Pursuant to the above decision the Board of Revenue vide 'notification No. 345/95/675-C-III, dated 21.5.1995 lifted the ban.
3. On learning about the decision in the above cases the petitioner again moved an application before D.C. Sheikhupura on 21.2.1998 and prayed that he may be given land as per his eligibility certificate but no action was taken on it. The petitioner moved another application before Member (Colonies) Board of Revenue, Lahore on 19.3.1998, which was marked down to Secretary (Colonies) tor examination.
It is submitted that the Secretary (Colonies) informed the petitioner that he would have to bring an order from the High Court in the nature of the order passed in the above mentioned writ petitions failing which no relief would be granted to him. Hence this writ petition.
4. It is contended that already this Court has declared the action of the Govt, regarding imposition of ban to be without lawful authority in the above noted cases and as such there was no justification available either for the District authorities or the Board of Revenue to refuse to treat the petitioner at par with those who have been granted relief by this Court. According to the learned counsel it was a case of discrimination.
Learned Law Officer while opposing this writ petition has contended that the petitioner could not take benefit of the decisions of the other cases as the judgments rendered therein were not in rem.
5. I find merit in this writ petition. The vires of the imposition of ban were examined in depth by this Court in earlier writ petitions on the subject, referred to hereinbefore. This ban having been declared to be without lawful authority there is no justification available for the respondents to refuse to allot land to the petitioner in lieu of his eligibility certificate. It was really not necessary for the petitioner to seek a pronouncement from the High Court all over, again, regarding the illegality of the impugned ban. It is indeed a case of discriminatory treatment.
6. For what has been stated above, this writ petition is accepted and a direction in the nature of mandamus is issued to respondent No. 2 to act in accordance with law and allot available state land measuring 12 acre 4 kanals anywhere in District Sheikhupura to the petitioner, in lieu of his eligibility certificate, within a period of three months. No costs.