ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH,

CIRCUIT COURT, HYDERABAD.

C.P No.D- 1816 of 2010

DATE             ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE

1. For orders on office objection

2. For Katcha Peshi

3. For hearing on M.A 7756/10

4. For orders on M.A 7923/11

5. For hearing on M.A 7924/11

10.03.2015.

 Mr. Noor Ahmed Memon advocate for petitioners.

Mr. Hemandas advocate for applicants/intervenors.

Mr. Allah Bachayo Soomro, Additional A.G.

                                                =

            The petitioners have prayed for direction against the respondent No.5 to hold Jalsa-e-Aam as required under the Land Revenue Act and mutate the share of petitioners’ deceased father in favour of petitioners in accordance with law. They have also sought further direction against the respondents No.13 and 14 to ensure that no illegal act shall take place by private respondents and shall not dispossess or encroach upon suit land without due course of law.

            Learned counsel for the petitioners pointed out Page-13 of the petition which is a report of Mukhtiarkar (Revenue) Badin communicated to the Executive District Officer (Revenue) Badin which shows that the petitioners’ father owned some share in the land in question but the counsel for the petitioners submits that such entry is missing so he has approached this Court. He further submits that on the report submitted by the Mukhtiarkar (Revenue) Badin, the Executive District Officer (Revenue) Badin has not passed any order.

            The disputed question of fact and factual controversy cannot be decided by this Court in writ petition. The petitioners have already approached the Competent Authority for deciding their matter. In order to resolve this controversy, the necessary provisions are already available under the Land Revenue Act where the petitioner may go and seek appropriate remedy.

            Though the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that matter is pending before the Executive District Officer (Revenue) Badin, but the learned State Counsel submits that the Deputy District Officer (Revenue) has already passed the order. Be that as it may, if the application of the petitioners is pending before the Executive District Officer (Revenue) Badin, the same shall be decided within a period of two months and if no such application is pending then the petitioners may file appropriate proceedings in accordance with law under the provisions of Land Revenue Act.

            M.A No.7924/11 has been moved under Order 1 Rule 10(2) CPC. The intervenors who have filed this application may also approach the authority where the petitioners’ application is pending for decision.

            Petition is disposed of in above terms along with listed applications.   

                                                                                                JUDGE

                                                            JUDGE

Ali Haider/P.A