| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1991 SLD 1890 = 1991 CLC 2088 |
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No. 633/11 of 1977, heard on 15th July, 1991.
Presented By: Before Malik Muhammad Qayyum, J
-------Muhammad Abdullah for Petitioners. Nemo for
Respondents Nos. 1 and 2. Hamid Ali Mirza for
Respondent No.3.
Writ Petition No. 633/11 of 1977, heard on 15th July, 1991.
Presented By: Before Malik Muhammad Qayyum, J
-------Muhammad Abdullah for Petitioners. Nemo for
Respondents Nos. 1 and 2. Hamid Ali Mirza for
Respondent No.3.
GHULAM QADIR and others---Petitioners
VERSUS
Mst. MUHAMMAD BIBI and others---Respondents
Law: Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act, 1958
Section: 10 , 11 , 2(1)
Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act (XLVII of 1958)------ ----Ss. 10, 11 & 2(1)---Transfer of land, cancellation of---Land temporarily allotted to Jammu and Kashmir refugees for purpose of maintenance, could not be cancelled under Sections 10 and 11 of the Act. Ghulam Muhammad v. Ahmad Khan and another PLD 1991 SC 391 ref. Ch. Muhammad Abdullah for Petitioners. Nemo for Respondents Nos. 1 and 2. Hamid Ali Mirza for Respondent No.3. Date of hearing: 15th July, 1991. JUDGMENT The petitioners are refugees from Jammu and Kashmir State and were allotted land measuring 30 Kanals 16 Marlas in village Sadharwali, Tehsil and District Sialkot for the purpose of maintenance vide Permit No.8314 dated 28-6-1954 issued by the Addl. Revenue Officer, Sialkot. The allotment was in favour of petitioner No.1 as head of the family. It appears that an application under sections 10 and 11 of the Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act was filed by respondent No.1 stating that the petitioners had obtained transfer of land at Khata No.116 of R.L.II Register in village Dhainsar Pain, Tehsil and District Gujranwala, therefore, they were not entitled to retain the land which was in their temporary allotment. The petitioners contested the application on the plea that although their claim had been verified for 426 PI Units, it appears to have been stolen by somebody who got land allotted in village Dhainsar Pain without the knowledge of the petitioners, and that allotment being unauthorised, may be cancelled. The learned Settlement Commissioner, however, found that in view of the transfer of the land in Dhainsar Pain, the petitioners were not entitled to retain the land in question which was ordered to be resumed. This order of the Settlement Commissioner dated 23-12-1976 has been assailed by the petitioners in this petition. Ch. Muhammad Abdullah, learned counsel for the petitioners, has reiterated the same arguments as were addressed by him before the Settlement Commissioner apart from contending that since the land in question has been allotted…