' This judgment will dispose of Writ Petition No,10344 of 1992, Writ Petition No,6/R of 1993 and Writ Petition No,1343 of 1993 as common questions of law and facts are involved in all of them and relate to the same property.
2. Briefly facts of the case are that Mst. Sardar Begum petitioner in Writ Petition No,10344 of 1992 .Now represented by her legal heirs has challenged letter issued by the Secretary (Colonies) Board of Revenue. No,1783-92/15, dated 12-9-1992 (Annexure "L") whereby it was communicated to the Commissioner, Faisalabad Division that the Board of Revenue has no hitch in allotting Killa No,2 to ,Fazal Ahmad of Square No,51 situated in Chak No,275/JB Tehsil and District Faisalabad with the request to implement the order of the Chief Minister contained in memorandum dated 20-5-1992.
' Writ Petition No,6/R of 1993 is by Fazal Ahmad against the order of Chief Settlement Commissioner, dated 12-12-1992 whereby he allotted Kila No,2 to Mst. Sardar Begum as evacuee property. Similarly Nabi Bakhsh petitioner in Writ Petition No,1343 of 1993 challenged the same order of Chief Commissioner, dated 12-12-1992 allotting Kila No,1 in favour of Mst. Sardar Begum petitioner in Writ Petition No,10344 of 1992.
3. According to Mst. Sardar Begum she is refugee from India and was allotted land measuring 188 Kanals, 2 Marlas comprising Square No,26, Kilas Nos.16, 17, 18, 23, 24, 25 Square No,28 Kila Nos.9/2, 21, 22, Square No,41 Kila Nos.1 and 20. Square No,50 Kila Nos.12, 13/1, 18/1, 19, 20 Square No,51 Kila Nos.1 and 2 (disputed) 3/2, 8, 9, 12, 13, 18, 19 against her Claim No,6794 at RL-II No,373 on 29-4-1953 in Chak No,275/JB Tehsil and District Faisalabad. Photo copy of RL-II is attached as Annexure "A".
4. The aforementioned land was crown land owned by the Provincial' Government and was exchanged with the evacuee land with the approval of the Custodian alongwith other bulk of land 5232 acres of evacuee land around the Faisalabad city was given to the Colony Department, Government of the Punjab and in exchange crown land measuring 7150 acres in various parts of Faisalabad District was converted into evacuee land Square No,51 Kila Nos.1 and 2, the disputed land alongwith other land was converted into evacuee property according to petitioner Sardar Begum and thereafter allotted to her at Serial No,378 of the exchange file from the State land into evacuee land vide File No,301/22-25-30(B), Board of Revenue Punjab, Lahore.
5. The disputed land comprises of Kila Nos.1 and 2 of Square No,51 measuring 16 Kanals out of the total allotment of the petitioner measuring 188 Kanals, 2 Marlas. The Government of the Punjab claimed that Kila Nos.1 and 2 of Square No,51 was never exchanged and it remained the State land throughout. The dispute relating to the allotment of the petitioner of aforesaid 2 Kilas and the character of land came under consideration before this Court in Writ Petition No,3652 of 1983 filed by petitioner Mst. Sardar Begum which was dismissed on 20-5-1987. She preferred Civil Appeal No,339 of 1990 in the Supreme Court which was also dismissed on 30-11-1991. Her Review Petition No,16/L of 1992 was also dismissed as under:-- "No case for review as the question of fact sought to be resolved has to be resolved by Collector/Member Board of Revenue by if necessary, correct of mutation.
2. Dismissed."
' Mst. Sardar Begum lost the case upto the Supreme Court and thereafter in the light of the observation made in the review petition applied to the Chief Settlement Commissioner which was taken up on the suo motu side. Fazal Ahmad petitioner in connected writ petition applied for becoming a party as he had been allotted Kila No,2 by the Colony Department as State land. He was added as respondent No,2 Learned Member Board of Revenue (CSC) took up the matter, examined the record and vide order, dated 12-12-1992 declared the aforesaid Kila Nos.1 and 2 as evacuee property on account of exchange and included them in Mutation No,358 of Chak No,275/JB in her favour. The subsequent allotment in favour of Fazal Ahmad was declared illegal.
6. Nabi Bakhsh petitioner in connected Writ Petition No,1343 of 1993 was allotted 4 Kanals of land from Kila No,1 by the Colony Department, therefore, by the order of the Chief Settlement Commissioner land allotted to him was also included in mutation of Mst. Sardar Begum, therefore, he also challenged said order in this Court.
7. During pendency of the writ petition Muhammad Arshad submitted C.M. No,460 of 1995 in Writ Petition No,10344 of 1992 for impleadment as respondent on the ground that Kila No,2 of the land in dispute was allotted to him by the Assistant Commissioner, Faisalabad under five years scheme in the year 1973 and his lease was extended twice upto 1980. He applied for grant of proprietary rights.
His request was turned down and subsequently he challenged the order of Collector and Additional Commissioner whereby an ex parte decree was passed in his favour for grant of proprietary rights. The Collector filed an appeal but subsequently the same was withdrawn, therefore, according to him he has become owner of Kila No,2 pursuance to civil Courts' decree dated 19-1-1986.
8. Mr. Muhammad Inayatullah Cheema argued that the applicant is owner of Kila No,2, therefore, any order passed by this Court is likely to effect him so he be impleaded as one of the respondents.
9. Ch. Muzammal Khan learned counsel for the petitioners in Writ Petition No,10344 of 1992 submits that the Chief Settlement Commissioner examined . The record and exclusively determined that Kila Nos.1 and 2 form part of the exchanged land and stood included in her allotment but due to some omission it was not included in Mutation No,358. Petitioner is a refugee claimant and is in its possession since 5-4-1966. Chief Settlement Commissioner on the basis of the record ordered inclusion of disputed kilas in her aforesaid mutation. The order, dated 12-12-1992, is, therefore, perfectly in accordance with law. The letter of the Secretary Board of Revenue dated 20-5-1992 to the Commissioner Faisalabad for the allotment of Kila No,2 of Square No,51 measuring 7 Kanals, 13 M arias to Fazal Ahmad respondent and petitioner in connected writ petition on the basis of the direction issued by the Chief Minister dated 20-5-1992 is illegal.
10. Syed Zafar Ali Shah and Sh. Abdul Aziz learned counsel for Fazal. Ahmad and Nabi Bakhsh petitioners in connected writ petitions and respondents herein submit that the character of the land and Alotment of Sardar Begum qua the disputed property had been finally settled by the judgment of the Supreme Court passed in C.P. No,339 of 1990 and the Chief Settlement Commissioner was not competent at all to accept the petition of Mst. Sardar Begum after dismissal of her appeal by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court upheld the judgment of the High Court whereby the character of the suit-property was held to be State land and as such, could not be allotted to Mst. Sardar Begum. Nabi Bakhsh and Fazal Ahmad were allotted land as ejected landless tenants. After the dismissal of writ petition of the petitioners the allotment of the suit-land was restored to them Chief Settlement Commissioner was not competent to set aside the allotment of Nabi Bakhsh and Fazal Ahmad. He also submits that Muhammad Arshad applicant in C.M. No,460 of 1995 procured ex parte decree from the Civil Court against the order of Collector and Additional Commissioner. He has not challenged the order of Member Board of Revenue, therefore, the said ex parte decree is in effective as the final order under the Colonization of Government Lands Act was neither set aside nor challenged by the said applicant. In these circumstances he has no right in the property.
11. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the relevant record. In Writ Petition No,3652 of 1983 Mst. Sardar Begum challenged order of Member Board of Revenue dated 24-4-1983 whereby the order of the Member Board of Revenue passed in R.O.R. No,902 of 1983 was maintained. She agitated the matter before the High Court against the order of Member, Board of Revenue claiming that Kila No,1 of Square No,52 was allotted to one Nabi Bakhsh by Government of the Punjab under the ejected tenant scheme for temporary cultivation which in the year 1960 was made permanent. Likewise Kila No,2 of Square No,51 was given to one Arshad Khan son of Dildar Khan in the year 1973 on five years lease for temporary cultivation. In the year 1980 she made an application to the Collector Faisalabad seeking cancellation of Kila Nos.1 and 2 of Square No,1 form the name of abovementioned persons Collector vide order, dated 19-4-1980 cancelled allotment of Nabi Bakhsh from Kila No, 1 . Regarding Kila No,2 case was referred to the A.C.
Faisalabad for necessary action. On 3-9-1979 Colony Department granted proprietary rights to lessees who were in occupation during the year 1976-77 onward under temporary cultivation scheme. Arshad Khan applied for proprietary rights to A.C. Faisalabad under the above scheme. His application was rejected, his review petition failed on 1-11-1980. He filed two appeals before the Commissioner, Faisalabad. Both the appeals were accepted on 7-12-1981 holding that Kila No,2 was a State land, since the exchange Mutation bearing No,358, dated 5-4-1966 did not include this kila number. Collector resumed Kila No,2. Petitioner instituted an appeal before the Additional Commissioner which was dismissed on 6-3-1983. Her revision failed. Thereafter, she instituted the aforesaid writ petition this Court in para.6 observed as under:-- "6. I have examined the original record which has been produced in Court. The starting point in terms of history of allotment of the land in question is RL-II No,373, dated 29-4-1953. There is obvious tampering with this record. Who has done it and where that has been caused is not a matter before this Court in these proceedings. Obviously some one with motivated impuls must have undertaken the venture. The second relevant record is Exchange evacuee land file bearing No,301/22- 25,30(B) at its page No,231, there is an entry dated 3-1-1958 showing Kila No,2 (Square No,51), in petitioner's name. The third crucial record is the exchange arrangement recording exchange of State land with evacuee land vide Mutation No,358 on 5-4-1966, which does not include Killa No,2 (Square No,51) which is the determining instrument. It confirms the title of the land as well as its status. This clearly demonstrates that the status of the land in question continued to be that of the State land and not evacuee. The mere fact that it finds a mention in the exchange evacuee land file that does not change the status of the land. This entry probably has been gathered from the RL-II No,378 which is a glaring manifestation of tampering with the record."
' Mst. Sardar Begum assailed the said order in the Supreme Court but the same was upheld. Her review petition was also dismissed with the observation as mentioned above',
12. The Chief Settlement Commissioner was not authorized by the Supreme Court to give findings contrary to the judgment of High Court and the Supreme Court. The review petition was dismissed with the observation that entries in relation to the mutation fall within the jurisdiction of revenue authorities and can be corrected but in the instant case the character of the disputed land was conclusively determined in para. 6 of the judgment of this Court. It was upheld by the Supreme Court and the findings recorded by the High Court and the Supreme Court had attained finality.
Chief Settlement Commissioner was not competent at all to hold contrary to the judgment of the High Court and the Supreme Court. He misconstrued the observation of the Supreme Court made in review petition. The original record was produced before the High Court and after examining it, it was held that Kila No,2 of Square No,51 is not included in exchanged land which is the determining instrument. The status of the land in question continued to be that of the State land and not evacuee. It was further observed that this entry probably has been gathered from RL-II No,373 which is glaring manifestation of tampering with the record. The High Court held that the land in question had not been exchanged and its status continued to be of the State land thus could not have been allotted to the petitioner as evacuee land. The aforesaid findings are binding upon all State functionaries. The Chief Settlement Commissioner was not competent to include disputed land in the mutation of Mst. Sardar Begum. The land continues to be the State land, therefore, Fazal Ahmad and Nabi Bakhsh were entitled to retain it under the A ejected tenant scheme Muhammad Arshad applicant was lessee for specific period. His lease has already expired. He has not challenged the order of Member Board of Revenue, therefore, ex pane decree obtained against the order of Collector and Additional Commissioner which have merged into the order of learned Member Board of Revenue is of no consequence. He has no vested right in the suit-property, therefore, his application for itnpleadment is hereby rejected.
13. For the reasons stated above, Writ Petition No,10344 of 1992 is dismissed with costs and Writ Petition No,1343 of 1993 and Writ Petition No,6/R of 1993 are allowed. The order of Chief Settlement Commissioner, dated 12-12-1992 is declared wholly without jurisdiction and of no legal effect.