Law: Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act, 1958

Section: 10 , 11 , 14

Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act (XLVII of 1958)--- ----Ss. 10, 11 & 14(1-A)---Evacuee Property Displaced Persons Laws (Repeal) Act (XIV of 1975), S.3---Allotment of land---Cancellation of---Parties agreed that case be remanded to decide afresh as Notified Officer had not fully examined material aspect of case after applying conscious mind---With consent of parties, case was remanded to Notified Officer for resolution of the question, whether or not Notified Officer possessed power to allow sale of excess land beyond claimant's entitlement and disposal of property after resumption and whether resumed land was to be given to informer if his entitlement was found to be genuine. Abid Hassan Minto for Petitioners. Muhammad Nasim Khan and Ch. Muhammad Nazir Ahmad for Respondents. Date of hearing: 18th February, 1990. JUDGMENT This writ petition has been filed on the principal grievance that jurisdiction of a Notified Officer in terms of sections 10 and 11 of the Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act was confined to cancellation of allotment of land if it was found to be bogus or without entitlement as a result of Mukhbari proceedings. The brief facts are that the petitioners were displaced persons from India and after migration to Pakistan after Independence were allotted land in village Jalalpur Sobtian District Gujrat in the year 1949. This was confirmed in their favour on 13-11-1953 by the Deputy Rehabilitation Commissioner. According to the averments of the petitioners themselves the land so confirmed included some land which was lying vacant in the village but had not been allotted to them nor was in possession of any other person. The case has a chequered history and it is unnecessary to recapitulate the entire course of events. There were Mukhbari proceedings against several persons which were decided by the Additional Commissioner, Rawalpindi Division purporting to possess the powers of Chief Settlement Commissioner, who vide order dated 15-4-1982 found that the respondents before him had excess entitlement and that in the interest of justice and fairplay the excess allotment of Produce Index Units to the respondents should continue and the…