This F.A.O. Has been directed against the judgment/order, passed by learned Additional District Judge, Bahawalpur, dated 13-2-2002 in application filed by the appellant/Malik Allah Bakhsh, under section. 11 of the Punjab Waqf Properties Ordinance, 1979.
2. Facts giving rise to the present F.A.O. Are to the effect that Chief Administrator Auqaf, Punjab, Lahore vide Notification No.SOP-1(966)-Auqaf/80, dated 13-4-1980 in exercise of powers under section 7 of the Ordinance referred to above took over and assumed the administration, control, management and maintenance of the shrine of Hazrat Baghuchi Pir Sahib, Mauza Hansra, Tehsil and District Bahawalpur. Alongwith the following property attached to the shrine i.e. (1) An area of four Kanals, three Marlas containing five rooms and two houses, shrine and a mosque bearing Khewat No.50, Khatooni No.77, Khasra No.125/13, according to Register Haqdaran Zamin for the year 1972-73 of Mauza Hansra, Tehsil and District Bahawalpur. (2) Offerings and subscriptions made to the said shrine.
3. One Muhammad Anwar filed u petition under section 11 of the said Ordinance assailing the vires of the said notification before the District Judge, Bahawalpur on the ground that the property was not the Waqf property, which was owned by him on which he had constructed the house by spending an amount of Rs.20,000 during the year 1980, so that it can be available to the pilgrims.
He maintained that he was a devotee of Khanqah Sharif from time immemorial through family and looked after the requirements of pilgrims who visited the shrine to pay homage to the saint and he claimed to be the direct descendent of Hazrat Baghuchi Pir Sahib and contended that the houses have been constructed by him from his own pocket. The application/petition was dismissed by the learned District Judge vide judgment dated 18-3-1984, maintaining the validity of the impugned notification. This order was challenged before the High Court through F.A.O. No.17 of 1984 by Mst.
Sharam Mai and others but it is strangely enough that said Muhammad Anwar/petitioner had not come up in appeal rather Mst. Sharam Mai and others had filed the same. This F.A.O. No.17 was dismissed on 21-6-2001 by the learned Singl6 Judge of this Court observing as under:-- "Since the stand of the appellant requires adjudication on merits, which can only be done if the parties are allowed to produce evidence, so on this short ground appeal fails and the appellants are directed to approach the Court of competent jurisdiction who, if approached, shall give due consideration to the question of limitation. "
4. On the other hand, one Bashir Ahmad son of Wali Muhammad filed a suit for declaration with regard to 5 Kanals and 4 Marlas of land known as "Khanqah Baguchiwala" acquired by the Auqaf Department claiming to be the owner of the property acquiring the same through inheritance. The trial Court dismissed the suit of Bashir Ahmad. His appeal against the judgment and decree dated 20-7-1987 of the trial Court had also been dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge vide judgment and decree dated 7-1-1990. Feeling aggrieved thereby, Bashir Ahmad filed a Revision Petition No.200 of 1990 before the High Court which also met with the same fate through judgment dated 21-6-2001.
5. The present appellant in compliance with the direction of this Court in F.A.O. No. 17 of 1984 filed a fresh application under section 11 of the said Ordinance which was dismissed through the impugned order which has been assailed through the instant F.A.O.
6. Since findings with regard to the matter in issue has already been given by this Court declaring the Notification issued by the Auqaf Department as valid piece of legislation and the judgments passed by this Court in F.A.O. No.17 and Civil Revision No.200 of 1990 have not been challenged any further and the same have, thus, attained finality, therefore, the instant F.A.O. Being devoid of force is dismissed.