RANA BHAGWANDAS, J.---This appeal with the leave of the Court arises out of an order dated 21-7- 1999 of the Lahore High Court disposing of appellants' writ petition with a direction to respondent No,2 i,e, Commissioner, Multan Division to decide the appeal filed by the appellants within a period of six months. By the same order, proceedings for recovery of the outstanding amount against the appellants were ordered to continue but they shall not be arrested till the decision of the appeal.
2. Predecessor-in-interest of the appellants was granted Square No,65 under Horse Breeding Scheme. During the life-time of the appellants' father; the grant was cancelled on the allegation of breach of condition of non-submission of progeny. Proceedings remained pending when action for illicit cultivation was initiated against the appellants and order of imposition of "Tawan" was passed against them. This order was challenged before different forums but without any success.
Appellants, thereafter, invoked Constitutional jurisdiction of the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench where a learned Single Judge disposed of the petition with the aforesaid observations.
3. Leave to appeal was granted to consider the legality of imposition of the "Tawan" on the appellants in the circumstances indicated above.
4. We have heard Chaudhry Muhammad Abdus Saleem learned Advocate Supreme Court for the appellants and Mrs. Afshan Ghazanfar, learned Assistant Advocate-General, Punjab on behalf of parties, it is irony of fate and we are amazed to learn that, despite specific direction by the apex Court to decide the appeal against the impugned order within six months, appeal pending before the Commissioner, Multan Division has not been disposed of so far. Indeed it is unfortunate to note that the Appellate Authority was directed to decide the appeal within six months B way back in October, 1999 yet the proceedings in appeal are stated to be hanging in fire without any hope of decision in near future merely because of pendency of the present appeal before this Court.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants attempted to argue on the merits of the appeal by assailing the order of "Tawan" upheld by the competent forums. We are afraid, as the appeal against the impugned action is sub judice before the competent forum, this Court is not expected to record any finding on the legality or otherwise of the order passed by the Collector Sahiwal.
6. Accordingly, this appeal is disposed of with a direction to the Executive District Officer (Revenue)
Sahiwal being the successor in office, exercising the powers of defunct Commissioner Multan in relation to the relevant proceedings to decide the appeal within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and submit compliance report to the Registrar of this Court, failing which disciplinary action may be initiated against him.