' KHALIL-UR-REHMAN RAMDAY, J.---One Rehmat Ali (the predecessor-in-interest of the respondents mentioned at Serial No.2) migrated to Pakistan in, the year 1947 from Mauza Dherian, Tehsil and District Hoshiarpur and settled in Chak No. 541/G.B. While one Wali Muhammad (predecessor-in- interest of the respondents mentioned at Serial No.3 in this petition) also migrated to Pakistan but from village Lavian of Tehsil and District Hoshiarpur and-he also settled in the same Chak No.541/G.B. Of Tehsil Samundari of now District Faisalabad. Both of them had independent families and were allotted 135 Kanals and 11 Marlas of land in the said Chak No.541/C.B. Under the Refugee Re-Settlement Scheme of 1949: The said scheme was then converted into Ejected Tenants Scheme.
The said Rehmat Ali and Wali Muhammad applied for the grant of proprietary rights in the above mentioned land. The Commissioner of Sargodha Division within which division Tehsil Samundari then fell, accorded sanction to the grant of proprietary rights in the said land to the said Rehmat Ali and Wali Muhammad by means of sale by private treaty. This was done through an order, dated 17-11-1996 of the said Commissioner.
2. It appears from the record that the predecessors-in-interest of the present petitioners namely Aziz Din and Ali Muhammad approached some authorities for grant of proprietary rights to them in the land in question independently of Rehmat Ali and Wali Muhammad. No application moved for the purpose is on record and we therefore, do not know the basis on which this claim had been made. However, the matter appears to have reached the Commissioner of Sargodha Division who through an order, dated 5-6-1975 declared that the proprietary rights could be granted only to the heads of the families and, that in case somebody felt aggrieved of the same then such a person could approach the Civil Court for establishing his rights. Neither the said Aziz Din nor the said Ali Muhammad approached the Civil Court for the purpose. Thereafter the Deputy Commissioner/Collector of then, District of Layllpur (now Faisalabad), through an order, dated 30- 5-1978 proceeded to implement the above mentioned order, dated 17-11-1966 of the Commissioner of Sargodha Division. This order of the Deputy Commissioner was challenged in appeal before the Additional Commissioner (Revenue) of Sargodha Division which dismissed the same through an order, dated 22-4-1979. The matter was then taken to the Board of Revenue and the revision petition was also dismissed through an order, dated 10-5-1979 observing that the grant of proprietary rights to Wali Muhammad and Rehmat Ali was in accordance with the policy instructions and that Aziz Din and Ali Muhammad, Predecessors-in-interest of the present petitioners had no right to claim proprietary rights as independent allottees. No further challenge was thrown to this order of the Board of Revenue which thus attained finality whereafter the requisite conveyance deed was executed in favour of the said Rehmat Ali and Wali Muhammad which was registered on 21-7-1980. Mutation No.895 was consequently sanctioned through an order, dated 31-7-1980. From a further order of Board of Revenue, dated 8-2-1983, it appears that the above mentioned Aziz Din and Ali Muhammad moved some further application before the Board of Revenue under section 30(2) of the Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act of 1912, seeking cancellation of the above mentioned order, dated 17-11-1966 of the Commissioner, Sargodha Division granting proprietary rights of the land in question to Rehmat Ali and Wall Muhammad. Pursuant. To the said application the Board of Revenue took up the matter, in exercise of its suo mote revisional jurisdiction and held that Rehmat Ali and Wali Muhammad above mentioned were to be treated as a single entity for the purpose of grant of proprietary rights under the Ejected Tenants Scheme and both of them were jointly entitled only to 64 Kanals of land; that the Commissioner was in error in granting proprietary rights to them through his order, dated 17-11- 1966 to the extent of 134 Kanals and 8 Marlas of land; that the conveyance deed above mentioned in favour of Rehmat Ali and Walt Muhammad for the said piece of land and the consequent mutation sanctioned in their families for the same was erroneous. He consequently set aside the order of the Commissioner, dated 17-11-1966; cancelled the above mentioned conveyance deed in favour of Wali Muhammad and Rehmat Ali with respect to 134 Kanals and 8 Marlas of land and revoked the consequent Mutation No.895 sanctioned in' their favour. He directed the Commissioner concerned to inquire into the matter afresh keeping in view the policy on the point and considering Rehmat Ali and Wali Muhammad to be entitled to one tenancy.
3. The said Rehmat Ali and Wali Muhammad questioned the said order of the Board of Revenue, dated 8-2-1983 before the Lahore High Court through Writ Petition No.3340 of 1983 which petition was allowed by the Hon'ble High Court through a judgment, dated 3-4-2002. Hence this petition.
4. We have examined the record in the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners.
5. From the above mentioned order, dated 8-2-1983 of the Board of Revenue, it appears that the predecessors-in-interest of the present petitioners had sought cancellation of the grant of land to Wali Muhammad and Rehmat Ali on the ground. That the land in question fell within the prohibitory zone; that Rehmat Ali and Wali Muhammad had never cultivated the land in question personally and it was the above mentioned Ali Muhammad and Aziz Din who used to cultivate the same as tenants paying Battai to Rehmat Ali and Wali Muhammad and that in the circumstances they were the ones who were entitled to the grant of proprietary rights of the land in question being in actual cultivating possession of the same.
6. The learned High Court, however, found that Wali Muhammad and Rehmat Ali belonged to two different villages of District Hoshiarpur in India; that they stood separately listed as heads of two independent families; that they had been assigned separate serial numbers in the Register of Temporary Allotments; that the matter of their entitlement had been scrutinized and assessed at different levels starting from the Collector of the District up to the Board of Revenue and it had never ever been found that they were not refugees from India or that they were not independent families or that they were not entitled to allotment of the land in question and that in the circumstances it could not be said that Rehmat Ali and Wali Muhammad had committed any fraud in securing allotment of the land in question or had made any misrepresentation for the said purpose: It may be added that in the above mentioned order, dated 8-2-1983 the Board of Revenue had not given any reason whatsoever for concluding that Rehmat Ali and Wali Muhammad were not heads of independent families and were not entitled to separate and independent tenancies in the land in question.
7. Having thus examined all aspects of the matter, we find that no exception could be taken to the impugned judgment of the Hon'ble Lahore High Court. This petition is therefore, dismissed. Leave refused.