' Briefly stated the facts are that Muhammad lqbal (disclosed as Iqbal Muhammad), predecessor- in-interest of respondents Nos.1 to 3 got verified claim equivalent to 1325 PIUs in respect of land abandoned by him in India. He was allotted land measuring 12 Acres and 17 Marlas equivalent to 439 PIUs at Khata No,203/240. RL-II, in Chak No,285-E Tehsil Pakpattan District, Sahiwal. His balance claim was settled in Chak Rauti, Tehsil Sadiqabad, District Rahimyarkhan, where he was allotted about 19 acres of land. The petitioner Ismail and others moved an application under sections 10 and 11 of the Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act, against Muhamamd Iqbal, predecessor-in- interest of respondents Nos.1 to 3 that he could not be allotted land against his entitlement in respect of Malkiat Mauroos under para.39, Part II of Rehabilitation Scheme. The. Deputy Settlement Commissioner vide order dated 15-2-1962 held that Muhammad Iqbal was not entitled to allotment in respect of 640 PIUs of Malkiat Mauroos and further ordered that allotment of land in Chak No,285-EB equivalent to 439 PIUs be cancelled and D.R.V. (L), Rahimyarkhan may be moved to reduce his entitlement by another 200 Units. The land thus, made available may be allotted to the Mukhbers (petitioners) against their outstanding entitlement.
2. The respondents Nos.1 to 3 (successors-in-interest of Muhammad Iqbal) assailed the said order dated 15-2-1962 before the Additional Rehabilitation Commissioner Multan by filing an appeal who vide order dated 6-3-1963 accepted the same, and allowed respondents Nos.1 to 3 to retain land in Chak No,285-EB Tehsil Pakpattan provided they produce certificate within six months from the D.R.C. (L), Rahimyarkhan to the effect that they had surrendered the excess area equivalent to 640 PIUs. It was also observed in case the respondents Nos.1 to 3 failed to produce the certificate within the specified time, the appeal would be deemed to have been dismissed in toto.
3. The respondents Nos.1 to 3 did not feel satisfied with the appellate order dated 6-3-1963 and preferred a revision petition before the Settlement and Rehabilitation Commissioner and Additional Commissioner (Consolidation), Multan Camp at Arifwala who disposed of the revision by his order dated 5-9-1963 in the following words:-- "This is a revision against the order of the Additional Settlement Commissioner dated 6-3-1963. The learned Additional Settlement and Rehabilitation Commissioner has ordered that 640 units allotted to the petitioners in Rahimyarkhan District should be cancelled and the excess units allotted to them in Chak. No,285-EB should also be cancelled. According to the petitioners they have got only 1290 units in excess of their entitlement and equal area of these units can be cancelled from their names in District Rahimyarkhan. The Patwari is present. He has brought the register RL.II but he has not got the calculating table with him nor he can verify whether the units have been correctly calculated or not. If, according to the petitioner's calculation only 120 units are in excess then equivalent area of these units should be cancelled from the names of the petitioners in District Rahimyarkhan otherwise the order of the learned Additional Settlement and Rehabilitation Commissioner should hold good. The revision is disposed of accordingly."
' The aforementioned order was implemented on 30-12-1970 by the D.S.C. And the area equivalent to 120 PIUs was cancelled from the Khata of respondents Nos.1 to 3.
4. On 12-8-1975 the matter again came up for consideration before the Assistant Commissioner with the powers of D.R.C. (L) Burewala District Sahiwal, who, vide his order of even date cancelled the entire land allotted to respodents Nos.1 to 3 in Chak No,285-EB. Having felt aggrieved of the said order dated 12-8-1975 respondents Nos.1 to 3 preferred Writ Petition No,857-R of 1975, which was disposed of vide order dated 1-7-1980 wherein order dated .12-8-1975 passed by respondent No,4 was set aside and the matter was remanded to the D.S.C. (L) Rahimyarkhan for determination of the exact entitlement of respondents Nos.1 to 3 and to dispose of excess land, if any held by them in accordance with law.
5. In order to implement order dated 1-7-1980 the matter was agitated before the Assistant Commissioner, with the powers of D.S.C. Sub-Division Sadiqabad, who vide order dated 28-6-1983 held that order dated 1-7-1980 had already been implemented. Feeling aggrieved of the order dated 28-6-1983 an application was moved with the Additional Settlement Commissioner (L), Rahimyarkhan by the present petitioners, who dismissed the same vide order dated 28-12-1987.
The petitioners have felt aggrieved of the said order and filed the instant writ petition.
6. Arguments have been heard and record perused.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioners has reiterated his contentions raised in the writ petition. His contention is that Iqbal Muhamamd predecessor-in-interest of respondents Nos.1 to 3 had the entitlement of 685 PIUs on account of Malkiat and 640 PIUs on account of Malkiat Mauroos, that he was allotted land against 439 PIUs in Chak No,285 EB and the remaining units were transferred to Rahimyarkhan where he was allotted land in village Rauti, that petitioners moved an application under sections 10 and 11 of Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act, against Iqbal Muhammad predecessor-in-interest of respondents Nos.1 to 3 who disposed of the same vide order dated 15-2- 1962, that respondents Nos.1 to 3 filed an appeal against the said order which was disposed of by the Additional Rehabilitation Commissioner vide order dated 6-3-1963, that the said order was assailed by way of revision which. Was decided by the Settlement and Rehabilitation Commissioner and Additional Commissioner (Consolidation) vide order dated 5-9-1963, that after the said decision the matter was again agitated before the D.R.C. (L) who vide order dated 12-8- 1975 cancelled the land in the name of respondents Nos.1 to 3, that respondents Nos.1 to 3 challenged order dated 12-8-1975 in Writ Petition No, 857-R of 1975 which was decided vide order dated 1-7-1980, that respondents Nos.1 to 3 could retain land only to the extent of 685 PIUs and had no entitlement in respect of 640 PIUs (Malkiat Mauroos), that land allotted to respondents Nos.1 to 3 is in excess of 685 PIUs, as such the same be cancelled from their names.
8. Conversely, the impugned orders have been supported by the learned counsel for respondents Nos.1 to 3. His contention is that as per comments submitted by respondent No,6, it is clear that claim of Iqbal Muhammad (predecessor-in-interest of respondents Nos.1 to 3) was reduced by 640 PIUs leaving his entitlement equal to 685 PIUs, that against 439 PIUs land in Chak No,285 EB has been allotted leaving a balance of 146 PIUs that land equal to 120 PIUs as ordered by the D.R.C.
Dated 15-2-1962 as well as of order of A.R.C. Dated 6-3-1963 and confirmed in revision vide order dated 5-9-1963 has been taken back from him by the D.S.C., as is evident from order dated 30-12- 1970 and has been allotted to other claimants, that this matter was again considered by Deputy Settlement Commissioner, Sadiqabad in the light of order of High Court dated 1-7-1980 and held that land in excess had already been taken back from respondents Nos.1 to 3, that the order dated 1-7-1980 passed in Writ Petition No,857-R of 1975 has been implemented and there being no force in this writ petition, the same be dismissed.
9. The only point which requires determination in the instant writ petition, is if the respondents Nos.1 to 3 have been allotted land in excess of their entitlement or not. Admittedly initially Iqbal Muhammad predecessor-in-interest of respondents Nos.1 to 3 was allotted land measuring 685 PIUs in respect of Malkiat (without mortgage) and land measuring 640 PIUs pertaining to Malkiat Mauroos. Thus, he was allotted land measuring 1325 PIUs. The stand of petitioners is that he was not entitled to land on account of Malkiat Mauroos. This aspect of the matter has been conceded by respondent No,6 in his written statement wherein he has stated that entitlement of lqbal Muhammad has been reduced to 640 PIUs. In view of this admission of respondent No,6, Iqbal Muhamamd (predecessor-in-interest of respondents Nos.1 to 3) is left with his entitlement of 685 PIUs. As per orders dated 15-2-1962, 6-3-1963 and 5-9-1963 of D.R.C., A.R.C. And Settlement Commissioner (Land) respectively, land against 439 PIUs has been allotted in Chak No, 285-EB to respondents Nos.1 to 3. Thus, a balance of 146 PIUs was at the credit of respondents Nos.1 to 3 and they have been allotted land in lieu of said units in Sadiqabad District, Rahimyarkhan. It was ordered by the A.R.C. Vide order dated 6-3-1963 that excess land to the extent of 120 PIUs be taken back from respondents Nos.1 to 3. This land has already been taken from respondents Nos.1 to 3 as is evident from the order of D.R.C. (L), Sadiqabad dated 30-12-1970. The said order has again been confirmed by the Assistant Commissioner/Collector Sadiqabad who is a Notified Officer, vide his order dated 26-6-1983. This order of A.C. Dated 26-6-1983 has been confirmed even by the A.R.C.
(L) vide his order dated 28-12-1987.
10. Since respondents Nos.1 to 3 have been allotted land in lieu of their 685 PIUs, so the question of taking away any land from them does not arise. The order dated 1-7-1980 passed in Writ Petition No, 857-R of 1975 has rightly been implemented by respondents Nos.5 and 6. There is no force in this writ petition and the same is hereby dismissed.