Find a Lawyer

Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 283 of 1970, decided on 9th December, 1970.

(On appeals from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 9th January, 1970 in Settlement Revision No. 31 of 1964).

---S. 11‑Allotment, .cancellation of‑Natural justice, principle of Allotments in question duly confirmed‑Allottees hence competent in law to transfer land without having obtained consent or approval of settlement authorities‑Transfer of land being permissible, transferees, held, entitled to show‑cause notice before cancellation of allotment, [Natural justice; principle of].

Maqbool Elahi Malik, Advocate, Supreme Court instructed by Masud Akhtar, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.

Nemo for Respondents.

The dispute in this case concerns certain‑lands in village Khuddpur, Tehsil and District Lahore. These lands were allotted to Mst. Aisha Begum and some others. The allotments were duly confirmed. Thereafter, on the 6th of March, 1962, the allottees sold the lands to the respondents herein. Sometime thereafter, the allotments, in respect of these lands were cancelled. The cancellation of the allotments was unsuccessfully challenged by the transferees, namely, the respondents. Thereupon, the respondents made a petition for revision in the High Court at Lahore under section 21 of the Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act, 1958. This revision petition was accepted on the ground that the allotments had been cancelled without giving the transferees an opportunity of being heard. The case was, however, remanded by the High Court to the Chief Settlement Commissioner with direction to deal with the matter after giving notices to the respondents. The petitioners, who are Deputy. Settlement Commissioner, and the Chief Settlement Commissioner, now seek special leave to appeal.

2. It is contended on behalf of the petitioners that although the trans ferees were not given any notice before the cancellation of the allotment, the allottees themselves were heard in the matter. It is also contended that the respondents as transferees were not entitled to be heard in the matter of cancellation of allotments. Undisputedly, the allotments in question were duly confirmed. The allottees were therefore competent in law to transfer the lands without having obtained the consent or approval of the Settlement Authorities. The transfer of the lands being permissible, the transferees were entitled, on the principle of natural justice, to notice before the cancellation of allotments.

3. The learned counsel contends that the allotments themselves being illegal, the transferees acquired no interest by their purchase and, as such, no notice was required to be served on them. Whether the allotments were valid or not is a matter to be decided by the Settlement Authorities in the presence of the transferees. So, we do not find any substance in this contention either.

The petition is dismissed.

Petition dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.