' SH. IJAZ NISAR, J.---Leave to appeal is sought against the order, dated 30-9-1997, passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore, in Writ Petition No.19779 of 1996.
2. Briefly stated the facts of this case are that Raja Noor Muhammad, father of the petitioner and respondent No.1, was tenant under the Horse Breeding Scheme in Chak No.26/2-L, Tehsil and District Okara, who died 25-11-1987, The question of re-allotment of tenancy under the policy letter, dated 19-2-1952 arose. Raja Muhammad Aslam petitioner and his . Brother Raja Muhammad Sarwar were the contesting candidates. The District Remount Officer, vide order, dated 2-4-1989, allotted the tenancy in favour of Raja Muhammad Sarwar respondent.
3. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Commissioner, Lahore Division, which was dismissed on 15-5-1990. His revision was dismissed by the Member (Judicial-II), Board of Revenue, Punjab on 23-5-1993. Thereafter, he filed a review petition in the Board of Revenue as well as a Constitutional petition in the Lahore High Court, which, too, were dismissed. Hence this petition.
4. It is contended that the concerned authorities did not consider the comparative merits of the petitioner and respondent No.1, and qualifications of the petitioner regarding Anatomy and Physiology of Domestic Animals were not given due consideration and undue weight was given to the report of the Remount Officer.
5. Admittedly, the Remount Officer had recommended the respondent for the grant of tenancy in question. The Deputy Commissioner, Commissioner and the Member, Board of Revenue had all gone by his report. The relevant para. Of the order of the Deputy Commissioner/ District Collector, Okara, dated 2-4-1999 may be advantageously reproduced showing the reasons for giving preference to respondent No.1 brother of the petitioner, in the matter of grant of tenancy:-- "... It is well-established that Horse Breeding Tenancy is not heritable but reverts to Government on the demise of a tenant. In the instant, case the performance record of ex-breeder was satisfactory therefore the tenancy is to be re-allotted in favour of one of the suitable heirs of the deceased breeder. Before making such allotment, the recommendations of DRO cannot be ignored as he is the technical as well as local representative of the Army Remount Department. Selection of a suitable tenant usually rests with the Army Remount Department as is held by the superior Courts.
Besides, Muhammad Sarwar candidate has not only gained sufficient experience in the management of bound animals but is also supported by the other family members. Presently, he is keeping the mare and tenancy in hand. There is sufficient evidence on record to prove that Raja Muhammad Aslam did not have good relations with his deceased father during his lifetime and he did not see his father for years together. Therefore, keeping in view his commitment as Government servant and his strained relation with his father, it is quite obvious that he did not gain any practical experience in maintaining the bound animals."
6. The above conclusion was accepted by all the fora including the High Court. The learned High Court observed that the choice of the Collector based on the recommendations of the District Remount Officer could not be demonstrated to be arbitrary, fanciful or capricious. Subedar Muhammad Asghar v. Mat, Safia Begum and another (PLD 1976 SC 435) may be cited wherein it was observed that the recommendations of the District Remount Officer were entitled to due weight and interference with the orders of the Collector and Board of Revenue in such matters in the exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court was disapproved.
7. For the foregoing reasons, we see no substance in the petition and dismiss the same.