ORDER AITZAZ-UR-RASHID KHAN, MEMBER (COLONIES).-- The application submitted by the petitioner to the Ministry for Revenue alongwith report dated 16.4.1998 of Deputy Commissioner, Okara for cancellation of Ihata from the name of respondents was received through the learned SMBR on 19.9.1998. The case was processed in the office and was fixed in peshi on 15.1.2000 after issuing show-cause notice under Section 30(2) of the Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act, 1912 to the respondents.
2. Briefly, the facts of the case, according to report dated 16.4.1998 are that Ihata No. 248 measuring 6 marlas and 5 sarsa his was allotted to the respondents on 29.7.1967 and the conveyance deed was issued on 30.7.1992 but a4 portion measuring 4 marlas and 7 sarsa his and the remaining portion of 1 maria and 6 sarsa his out of Ihata in question was still in an. Unauthorised possession of Mst. Karam Bibi widow of Sher Muhammad, Caste Ansari and Jalal Din son of Choghata, Caste Mochi respectively residents of Chak No. 38/2-RA, Tehsil and District Okara who have construed their houses thereon. The respondent Irshad Ahmad filed suit for possession in the Civil Court which has been dismissed on 19.11.1999 for want of proof regarding possession. Show- cause notice was issued to the respondents to explain the reason on 15.1.2000 as to why the conveyance deed of Ihata No. 248 issued in their favour should not be rescinded under Section 30(2) of the Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act, 1912.
3. The case was fixed for production of record and arguments on 12.7.2001 in presence of the parties. The case was called several times but neither the petitioner nor her counsel has appeared Mr. Muhammad Yousaf, Advocate, counsel for Mushtaq Ahmad and Irshad Ahmad, respondents are present. Mr. Gulzar Ahmad, Colony Clerk, Office of the Deputy Commissioner, Okara is present with record. A perusal of record reveals that the respondents were allotted the Ihata in question.
They read to have paid the full price. Some litigation is going on between the present occupants and the original allottees. The Deputy Commissioner's reference has been perused, It reads that Mushtaq Ahmad and other have instituted a suit in the Civil Court seeking possession of the Ihata in question as Jalal Din s/o Chughatta is in occupation of Ihata to the extent of one maria and 6 sarsa his. Sher Muhammad Ansari is in occupation of the remaining 4 marlas and 7 sarsa his of the Ihata in question. The payment of the Ihata by the original allottees has also been considered alongwith the execution of sales-deed. It is stated that the powers for cancellation of the sale- deed vest in the Board of Revenue. No reference, however, has been made to any order in the petitioner's favour. The petitioner and Jalal Din are occupying the Ihata in question illegally. It has nowhere been shown as to whether the respondents had obtained the allotment of Ihata in question due to fraud, ineligibility or concealment of facts. Mere illegal possession of the Ihata by the petitioner cannot be made the basis of assailing the allotment of the respondents under the Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act, 1912. No case is made out for invoking the provision of Section 30(2) of thew Colonization of Government Land (Punjab) Act, 1912.. The petition is dismissed and the show-cause notice issued to the respondents under Section 30(2) of the Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act, 1912 is withdrawn.