BEFORE LAHORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY COMMISSION,LAHORE

PRESENT:

Mr. Javaid Akhtar, Chairman

Mr. Muhammad Yousaf, Member

Reference No. 88/2018

Rana Salman Asif Slo Rana MuhammadAsif, RIo 17 Raza Block,Allama Iqbal Town, Lahore.

Applicant

Vs.

1. Lahore Development Authority through Director General, 467/D-II,Main Boulevard, M.A. Johar Town, Lahore.

2. Director, Land Development-I, 467/D-II, Main Boulevard, M.A.Johar Town, Lahore.

RespondentsOrder

Rana Salman Asif slo Rana Asif Mehmood submitted application atOne Window on 15.07.2017 vide receipt No. 2456446 for filing reference tothe LDA Commission. The Authorized Officer under sub-section (4) ofsection 32 of LDA (Amendment) Act, 2013 read with sub-rule (1) of the Rule7 of the Lahore Development Authority Commission Rules, 2014, referredthe case to the Commission which was received on 16.01.2018. It wasentered in the Institution Register at Serial NO.88/2018.

Noticeswere issued to the Applicant, the Director General LDA and DirectorLand Development-I, Patwari Directorate Land Development-I LDA andother witnesses. The statements of the Applicant Rana Salman Asif, Mst.Irshad Bano, Mr. Khadam Hussain Khokhar and Mr.Sultan MazharMahmood witnesses were recorded on oath. The statement of Mr. RehanAkbar Deputy Director-1 LDAwas also recorded. File of the plot No JTNB-I-319 attached with the reference by the Directorate Land Development-I(hereafter referred to as plot file) was examined. Related File No.JT/NB1/160+161 was also requisitioned and examined.

2. According to the reference filed by the LDA;

"Succinct facts of the case are that one, Mr. Muhammad AkramSlo Noor Muhammad claimed ownership of land measuring 1 kanal

Page 1 of 12

14-marla comprising Khasra No. 13264, 13265 and 13289 Mouza NiazBaig with reference to LAC Award part-B Sr # 455 & Award Part-C Sr.# 298 dated 09.10.1982 (Copy of award Page 000013/C main file).Firstly he procured exemption of plot in lieu of said land on file No. JT­NB-I-160 & 161. Subsequently he concealed this fact and againstsame land procured exemption of plots No. 267 & 361 Block-B-3, eachmeasuring 105 Sqm in M.A. Johar Town Scheme on file No. JT-NB-I-319. The instant case pertains to plot No. 361, Block-B-3, M.A. JoharTown, Lahore.

Allocation letter of plot No. 361 Block-B-3 was issued vide No.JT-NB-I-319-Al19505 dated 12.07.1999 (page 000057/C), exemptionletterwas issued vide No. JT-NB-I-319/23410 dated 19.08.1999 (page000071/C) and possession order was issued vide No. JT-NB-I-319/23947 dated 26.08.1999 (page 000087/C). Letter of SEa, LOAregarding delivery of physical possession of plot No. 361 Block-B-3,M.A. Johar Town Scheme issued vide No. 9782 dated 24.09.1999 isat (page 000097/C).

Muhammad Akram executed General Power of Attorney of hisland measuring 1-kanal 14-marla, comprising Khasra No. 13262,13264, 13265 etc. Mouza Niaz Baig in the name of MuhammadShafqat Slo Ghulam Farid, Oestaviz No. 76, Bahi No.4, Jild No. 640dated 06.01.1990 registered with Sub Registrar City Lahore (Page000089/C). Thereafter, through his General power of AttorneyMuhammad Shafqat transferred plot No. 361, Block-B-3, M.A. JoharTown Scheme in the name of Mst. Irshad Bano Wlo Khadim Hussainvide transferred letter No. JT-NB-I-319/27143 dated 29.03.2001 (page000311/C). Mst. Irshad Bano wlo Khadim Hussain further transferredthis plot to Rana Salman Asif Slo Rana Asif Mehmood vide transferletter No. JT-NB-I-319/8809 dated 27.08.2005 (page 000313/C).Lastly Rana Salman Asif gave application OWO No. 1670851 dated04.09.2012 for transfer of plot No. 361, Block-B-3 in the name of Mst.Aisha Rasheed KhanWlo MuhammadAsim Khan (page 343/C) whichis still pending.

The office issued show cause Notice to transferee Rana SalmanAsif vide No. JT/NB-1I319+Al11327dated 10.10.2012whereby hewasintimated that despite original exemptee had already procuredexemption on file No. JT-NB-I-160 & 161 he fraudulently again securedexemption of plots on file No.JT-NB-1319and as the plot presentlystands in his name therefore, hewas required to show cause as to whyplot may not be cancelled from his name. (page 373/C).

Now, Rana Salman Asif vide his application OWO No. 2456446dated 15.07.2017 has claimed himself to be a bonafide purchaser of

Page 2 of 12.

~O'l,.\t

plot No. 361, Block-B-3, M.A. Johar Town and requested forsubmission of his case before LDA Commission for bonfa fidepurchasers. "

3. In light of reports obtained from different quarters, LDA submittedfollowing facts and observations regarding the instant case:

I. "Land Acquisition Collector, LDA at para # 204 to 206 and 233-234/N has verified the ownership of original exempteeMuhammad Akram S/o Noor Muhammad with reference toAward Part-B Sr. No. 454 as land 1 kanal 14 marla comprisingkhasra No. 13284 min, 13264 min, 13262 min, 13265 min,Mouza Niaz Baig.

II. The Revenue Staff at para No. 180 to 186/N and 236/N hasreported that in Khasrawar Register two files have been foundconstructed in the name of Muhammad Akram S/o NoorMuhammad i.e. JT-NB-I-319 and JT-NB-I-161 & JT-NB-I-160.He has procured exemption/allocation of plots on both files.

III. At para No. 225/N, the Directorate of Revenue, LDA has verifiedamounts paid against file No. JT-NB-I-319 in respect of plot No.361, Block-B-3, M.A. Johar Town Scheme including transfer fee.

IV. The status of plot No. 361, Block-B-3, M.A. Johar Town inpossession register and at site was sought from SED, LDA. TheEstate Branch has reported at para 220/N that entry of plot inpossession register is made in the name of Muhammad AkramS/o Noor Muhammad against file No. JT-NB-I-319. As per sitereport a double storey building has been constructed at site.

V. The Town Planning Wing, LDA at para No. 223/N has reportedthat building plan of plot No. 361, Block-B-3, M.A. Johar TownScheme was sanctioned in the name of Mst. Irshad Bano(transferee) vide No. BA717/JT/17231 dated 01.09.2004 andcompletion certificate was issued on 13.06.2005.

VI. Instant file is entered in the inventory list of 2008.

VII. The scrutiny list was consulted and the instant file is not includedin those files which are under scrutiny.

Page 3 of 12

VIII. Appearance along with original documents of Mr. Salman AsifSio RanaAsif MehmoodCNIC No. 35202-4910357-9 is recordedat para 229/N."

4. RanaSalman Asif, the Applicant appeared on 14.02.2018and recordedhis statement on oath. He contended that he purchased a constructed houseon plot No. 361 Block B-III, MA Johar Town from Mst. Irshad Bano against asum of Rs. 43,00,0001-. He paid the amount of Rs. 40,00,0001- throughcheques of Allied Bank while Rs. 3,00,0001- were paid in cash at the time oftransfer. An Agreement to Sell was scribed and signed by parties in thepresence of witnesses (Mark-I). He also averred that at the time of transfer,representative of Muslim Commercial Bank also came and checked the file.He disclosed that he had already sold the house to Abdul Rashid Khan sloSikandar Khan against a sum of Rs.40,00,0001- and has received an amountof Rs.36,00,0001-. Mst. Irshad Bano wlo Khadim Hussain in a shortstatement admitted her signature on transfer application but clarified that allthe proceedings of sale of the house were completed by her husband. Mr.Khadim Hussain Khokhar slo Nizam Din Rio House No. 842-E, Johar TownLahore stated that though house belonged to his family but it wasconstructed by their relative Sultan Mazhar. They had already sold the plotto him against a sum of Rs. 11,00,0001- who constructed the house andnegotiated the sale of house with the Applicant. Since the plot was in thename of his wife the sale document and cheques were prepared in the nameof Mst. Irshad Bano. He admitted that his wife signed the Agreement to Sellat Mark-I. He concluded that there is no outstanding amount towards theApplicant. Mr. Sultan Mazhar supported the version of Mr. Khadam HussainKhokhar and stated that he had no amount outstanding against Mst. IrshadBano.

5. The examination of plot file revealed that application for exemption wasfiled by Muhammad Shafqat slo Ghulam Farid Rio House No. 331 Block 13,B-1, Township Lahore claiming GPA of Muhammad Akram slo NoorMuhammad. As per his ID card No. 335-89-318751 the address ofMuhammad Shafqat was Chak No. 73/5 L, Tehsil and District Sahiwal. Heclaimed in the application that he was owner of land measuring 01K-14M inMauza Niaz Baig in 12 Khasra numbers. According to photocopy availablein the plot file at pages 00035-41, GPAwas registered with office of the Sub­Registrar on 06.01.1990. As per Fard available in the file, MuhammadAkrambecame owner of land through mutation No. 12043. Although applicationwas initiated on 24.01.1990 the allocation of two 105 sqm plots wereallocated and approved by DLA on 05.07.1999. The exemption letter of plotNo. 361 Block B-III MA Johar Town was issued on 19.08.1999 vide LDAletter No. JTNB-I 319/23410 in favour of Muhammad Akram through

Page 4 of 12

1..~.

Muhammad Shafqat. Therefore actually Mr. Shafqat obtained the exemption,disposed of the plot and got transferred in favour of Mst. Irshad Bano. Shepurchased the plot through a property dealer named Mr. Nazir.

6. In file No. JTNB-I-160+161 the application for exemption of plot wasfiled by Mst. Hanifan Bibi 0/0 Muhammad Hayat RIo Bonga Madran TehsilChunian District Kasur in lieu of her land measuring 01K-14M falling inKhasra No. 13207. According to copy of Award part C available at page00003 she was mentioned at serial No. 477. Her present address wasmentioned as 106 Hunza Block Allama IqbalTown Lahore. She was allowedexemption of two plots measuring 105 sqm each on 07.03.1988 by DirectorLand Development. Two plots No. 456 and 457 in Block E-II in Johar Townwere allocated on 26.03.1988. From the note in para 17/N and Page 000015it appears that plot No. 458 and459, Block E-II Johar Town had already beenallocated to Muhammad Akram. But on an application filed by Mst. HanifanBibi and Muhammad Akram, the Allocation Committee allowed jointexemption of one plot No.6, Block G, Johar Town Lahore to both applicants.The allocation letter for Plot No.6 Block G Johar Town measuring 420 sq.min the name Mst. Hanifan Bibi and Muhammad Akram was issued vide No.NB-160-161/5267 dated 10.05.1988. The exemption letter was issued on02.08.1988. But the possession letter was issued to these two exempteesthrough MuhammadArsahd slo Ch. MuhammadSadiq RIo 106Hunza BlockAllama Iqbal Town Lahore. He had obtained the GPAs from both theexemptees on 10.02.1988. Therefore, actually the whole proceedings ofexemption and changes in allocation of plots were got processed by him.Since Muhammad Akram had obtained his share of exemption in plot No.6BlockG, Johar Town, the processing of exemption of plot in 1990 in his namein file No. No JTNB-I-319 (plot file) was a fraudulent exercise. Mentioning oftwelve khasra numbers in the application for exemption itself shows thatMuhammadShafqat himself did not have the knowledge of actual ownershipof Muhammad Akram. He therefore had committed fraud to get theexemptions with the assistance of LDA staff.

7. LDA has alleged the grant of double exemption against theownership of Mr. Muhammad Akram but it has neither challenged theexemption order dated 19.08.1999 nor the claim of the Applicant RanaSalmanAsif. The record and evidence shows that he purchased the plotwitha house built on it and LDA had issued building completion certificate on13.06.2005. At the time of transfer there was nothing in file which couldindicate about any dispute over ownership of the land or double exemptionrather a clearance certificate was issued by LDA to Mst. Irsahd Bano on17.06.2005. Therefore, the Commission despite the alleged doubleexemption against the same land to the original Exemptee, in view of Sub-

,Page 5 of 12

Section (4) of Section 32 of the LOA (Amendments) Act, 2013 read with Sub­section (5) of Section 32 of the Act (ibid) has to consider the presentreference to resolve the dispute. The above-mentioned provisions of the Actare reproduced below:

"(4) The Authority or any officer so authorized by the Authority, on itsown motion or on the application of any person, may refer any matterto the Commission for consideration, resolution and decision if a primafacie case is made out."

"(5) The Commission shall consider and make appropriaterecommendations on matters pertaining to;

(a) bona fide purchase for value owing to irregular orfraudulent transaction in respect of property, the extent oflegality or illegality of the transaction, apportionment ofresponsibility in irregular or fraudulent transaction andtranslation of this responsibility into monetary terms andrecommendation of such conditions, fines, rate or fix price,retrieval of property and demolition as deemed appropriateaccording to the nature of each case."

B. Exemption of the plot was transferred to the Applicant by LOAon thesame terms and condition on which it was held by the Exemptee. Relevantportion of transfer letter No. JT/NBI-319/BB09 dated 27.0B.2005 (page000313 plot file) is reproduced below:

"I am to inform you that the exemption of the plot cited above hasnow been transferred in your name on the terms and conditions itwas held by the original Exemptee."

The Applicant accepted the terms and conditions of the transfer. He himselfsigned the endorsement on the transfer application (page 000249 of plot fileNo. JT/NB-I/319) which reads;

"I endorse the above application and if the property is transferred tome, I as successor in interest or (assignee) shall be subject to allthe conditions and terms contained in the Agreement/Exemptionletter between the transferor and the Lahore Department Authority."

9. In the affidavit at page 00253 of plot file No. JTNB-I/319, filed with thetransfer set, the Applicant undertook to abide by the terms and conditions ofthe exemption of the said plot between the original Exemptee and LOA and

to c~mpl~ith allorders and direc::~: :fnl:instructionsetc~~:~ is~ued

~ '-.J~o~.\,

~.

from time to time by the LOA. Therefore, whatever rights have come to vestin the Applicant, those did not constitute full and absolute title in the plot. TheApplicant, despite double exemption granted by LOA, was bound to fulfill theconditions laid down in the Exemption letter No. JTNBI-319/23410 dated19.08.1999 issued to the original Exemptee. The Applicant, therefore, musthave been aware of the fact that his purchase was subject to the incident ofthose conditions which are contained in the exemption letter issued by theAuthority. The LOA had a right to cancel the allocation/exemption of plotunder clause 17 of the Exemption Letter No. JT/NB-I/319/23410 dated19.08.1999 which reads;

"That if at any stage your title is proved to be defective, theexemption of the plot shall stand automatically withdrawn and LOAwill be entitled to take over the land along with structure standingthereon without payment of any damage or compensation. (E & 0are to be taken up at any stage.)"

1O. Although the exemption was transferred by LOA i.e. the real owner ofthe plot, yet the fact remains that the transfer was made conditionally andthe Applicant accepted those conditions without any objection. Everypurchaser of exemption rights is supposed to have knowledge that thetransaction of purchase is subject to those conditions which are contained inthe agreement for exemption or in the exemption letter. At this stage thecontention of the Applicant that he was not aware of the terms and conditionscannot be accepted. This being so, the Vendee despite being innocent buyercannot raise the plea of protection on the principle of section 41 of theTransfer of Property Act, 1882 which relates to the transfer of property by anostensible owner. In the present case it was a conditional sale and theApplicant is bound to fulfill the conditions accepted by him at the time oftransfer of exemption in his favour. Moreover, Applicant's rights beingVendee of exemption rights cannot exceed the rights vested in the Vendorwho was not full owner of the plot and did not have proprietary rights of theplot. Therefore, for acquiring proprietary rights the Applicant is subject to theconditions of the sale as per terms and conditions of exemption.

11. Land for M.A. Johar Town Scheme was acquired on the basis ofexemption which means that 30% of the acquired land of owners wasexempted in shape of plots and they, on certain specific terms andconditions, were allocated developed plots equal to their right of exemptioni.e. 30% of their total holding acquired/surrendered. Title of the exemptedplot is, however, transferred on fulfillment of the terms and conditions ofexemption. Therefore, the Exemptee is not a full owner and exemption letterdoes not constitute an absolute title in the plot. The title of the plot remains

Page 7 of 12

-L- _

vested in the LDA till exchange deed is executed. The above-mentioned plotwas purportedly exempted against the land of Khasra Nos. 13284 etc. MauzaNiaz Baig, falling in M.A. Johar Town Scheme. The Applicant was transferredexemption rights subject to the terms and conditions contained in theexemption letter and was bound to transfer the land against which theexemption was granted, in favour of LDA by executing an exchange deedafter completion of building as per Clause 16 of the exemption letter No.JT/NB-I/319/23410 dated 19.08.1999 (Pages 000071-72) which reads:

"That you shall be required to execute an Exchange Deed, after thecompletion of the building, in accordance with the sanctioned plan. Allexpenditures i.e. cost of stamps, Registration fee and other fees, taxesfor the execution of this deed shall be borne by you."

12. The defect in the ownership of the original Exemptee's land or plea offraud or irregularities committed by the LDA or the Revenue Departmentfunctionaries does not absolve the Applicant from abiding by the terms andconditions of the transfer of exemption accepted by him, even if the entiretransaction and proceedings before transfer of exemption are proved to befraudulent nor can he raise the plea of protection on the principle of section41 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. In case he fulfills the terms andconditions accepted by him at the time of transfer of exemption, LDA shallbe bound to transfer to him the proprietary rights, notwithstanding the fraudor collusion committed by the LDA officers/officials to which the Applicantwas not a party. The original Exemptee paid the development charges whichas admitted by LDA have been duly verified. The Applicant paid transfer feebut the price of the plot was not paid by him or his predecessors to the LDAand instead the Applicant took upon himself to transfer land to LOA byexecution of an exchange deed. The Vendor has not paid any price of theland of plot nor transferred land to the LOA, therefore, the price paid by theApplicant to the Vendor does not include the price of the land which was tobe transferred to LOA in exchange of the subject plot. The Applicant is liableeither to transfer the above-mentioned land to the LDA or alternatively inorder to resolve the dispute, to pay the price of the land of the plot for transferof title of the plot in his favour.

13. In view of the position, as has been noticed by the Commission fromthe Revenue record, the Applicant in the presence of double exemption inthe name of original exemptee, cannot get transferred the required land tothe LOA as per terms and conditions of the Allocation letter, therefore, hehas to acquire proprietary rights on payment of the price of the plot (minusdevelopment charges already paid by original Exemptee). In case the plothad been in the name of the original Exemptee who got it allocated allegedlyon the basis of fraud and collusion, the plot would have been certainly

Page 8 of 12

I

cancelled and he could not have any right for its regularization. But whenthe plot was first transferred to Mst. Irsahd Bano wlo Khadam Hussain, shewould have been entitled to retain the plot under these proceedings onestablishing that she was a bona fide purchaser. Therefore, the same rightcan be claimed by the present Applicant. The right of exemption i.e. to getthe title of the plot by transferring ownership of above mentioned land, wasconferred by the LOAwhen the LOA transferred exemption to the Applicanton receipt of transfer fee, therefore, price of the plot as on 29.03.2001 as perDC's Valuation Table along with charges for delayed payment, should becharged to him in order to resolve the dispute as envisaged in sub section(4) of section 32 of the LOA (Amendments) Act, 2013 which reads:

"(4) The Authority or any officer so authorized by the Authority, on itsown motion or on the application of any person, may refer any matterto the Commission for consideration. resolution and decision if a primafacie case is made out."

14. According to the DC's valuation table notified on 09.06.1999 thepricelmarla in Mouza Niaz Beg was RS.200001- by inflating it to the time of15t transfer, i.e. 29.03.2001 the price per Marla works out to Rs. 260001-.Thus price of 114.25 sq.m. plot comes to Rs. 1,41,452/-The Applicant'spredecessor paid to the LOA Rs1,7791- on 07-03-1995 and Rs.11,4731- on26.07.1999 as development charges. Sui gas charges paid are not part ofthe price of the plot and similarly the amounts paid subsequently for buildingperiod extensions or any additional amount recovered on account of delayedpayments cannot be considered part of the cost of the plot. However, theamount of Rs.13,252/- paid as development charges can only be consideredas part of the price of the plot.

It was the responsibility of the Applicant as discussed above, to gettransferred 01K-14M land to the LOA however as per report no land isavailable due to double exemption obtained by the original Exemptee, asexplained in paras-5/6 above. It is the Applicant who failed to abide by theterms and conditions of the exemption, therefore, he is liable to pay cost ofdeficient land along with markup @17.5% per annum for delayed paymentas specified in clause 2 of the allocation letter dated 12.07.1999 and clause3 of the exemption letter dated 19.08.1999.On account of his failure to fulfillthe terms and conditions of exemption, he will now have to pay to LOA anamount of Rs.4,73,797/- worked out below:

Sr. No. Description Amount in Rs.

1) Price of the 114.25 sq.m. plot as per 1,41,452/-District Collector's Valuation

Page 9 of 12

nearest to the date of 1st.Transfer ofExemption i.e. 29.03.2001

2) Dev. Charges paid on 07.03.1995 1,779/-

3) Mark up on Dev Charges amounting to 1,888/-Rs.1,779/- for the period From07.03.1995 to 29.03.2001 (1st. Transfer)

4) Dev. Charges paid on 26.07.1999 11,473/-

5) Mark up on Dev Charges amounting to 3,366/-Rs.11 ,473/-for the period

From 26.07.1999 to 29.03.2001

6) Total Development charges with markup 18,506/-

7) Cost of plot land (Total value - Dev. 1,22,946/-Charges paid)

8) Add mark up for the period from the 3,50,851/-date of 1st. transfer ofexemption to the date of filing ofapplication (15.07.2017)

9) Tota I cost of plot to be paid by the 4,73,797/-applicant to resolve thedispute

In case any patent error or omission apparent from the face of the record, issubsequently discovered in the above computation, the Commission mayrectify the same on its own or an application by either party.

15. From the record and the evidence produced by the Applicant and thefile of exemption to Mst. Hanifan Bibi and Muhammad Akram JTNB­i/160+161 it appears that

I. The exemption to Muhammad Akram in lieu of his land hadalready been granted. The double exemption was maneuveredby Muhammad Shafqat s/o Ghulam Fareed (GPA) R/o 331,Block 13, B-1Town Ship Lahore (10 Card No.335-89-318751) inthe name of Muhammad Akram either with his assistance or byhis solo effort through fraud and misrepresentation.

II. There was no thing on the file at the time of transfer of plot infavour of the Applicant that double exemption had been granted .

Page 10 of 12

...

III. The Applicant purchased the plot in good faith after gettingreasonable inquiry conducted from LOA.

IV. He had paid full and fair price of the plot to the Vendor for transferof exemption rights and possession of the plot. He moved into aconstructed house on the plot whose completion certificate hadbeen issued by LOA.

Therefore, he is held to be a bona fide purchaser of the rights of exemptiongranted by LOA to the original Exemptee.

16. In view of the above discussed facts, the record perused and theevidence examined, recommendations of the Commission are as under:

I. Notwithstanding the fact that under clause 17 ibid, the LOA isauthorized to cancel exemption of plot No.361, Block B-III, M.A.Johar Town, Lahore, it is recommended to resolve the disputethat on payment to the LOA by the Applicant an amount ofRs.4, 73,797/- as worked out above as price of the land of theplot, in lieu of the land which was to be surrendered to LOA, theApplicant will be allowed to retain the plot and proprietary right ofthe plot will be transferred in favour of the Applicant.

ii. In case no appeal is filed by the Applicant or by the LOA againstthis order, LOA shall issue, within 30 days after the expiry of thetime prescribed for the appeal or from the date of the applicationmade by the Applicant, whichever is earlier, one or two Challansat the option of the Applicant for the payment of the aboveamount in lump sum or in two quarterly installments.

iii. Subsequent to the payment of the above determined amount bythe Applicant, the title of the Applicant or his successor in interestat no stage, shall be called in question by LOA and the cases forsanction of the building plan, commercialization, issuance ofNOC, further transfer etc. in respect of the above plot shall beprocessed by LOA as per relevant rules/policy in vogue.

iv. In case the Applicant fails to pay the above amount within sixmonths from the date of the issuance of the Challan(s), the LOAmay, retrieve the plot but not without compensation as envisagedin the clause 17 of the Exemption Letter read with the transferletter. On retrieval of the plot LOA will refund the developmentcharges received with markup @ 17.50/0from the date of thepayment of development charges to the LOA up to the date ofthe LOA's cheque for the refund amount payable to the Applicant.The amount so calculated shall be refunded within one month of

,the retrieval of the plot. ~1I1~ n

Page 11 of 12 '-'\....J'o'~ ~o~, \g;

v. If the Applicant has raised construction on the plot after approvalof the building plan, he will be entitled, in case of retrieval of plotby LOA, to receive compensation for the construction or anyother development made by him as determined by the ChiefEngineer, UO Wing, LOA. However, no compensation for thestructure will be payable in case the building plan was notapproved by the competent authority.

vi. Director General, LOA may refer the case to NAB or ACE asdeem fit, recommending investigation in the matter of exemptionto Muhammad Akram slo Noor Muhammad through his GPAMuhammad Shafqat Slo Ghulam Fareed 10 Card No. 10 CardNo.335-89-318751 in File No. JTNB1/319.Director General mayalso conduct inquiry regarding the double exemption todetermine the involvement of the staff of LOA.

~~.1I1f1l(Muhammad Yousaf)

Member, LOAC

Announced

29.08.2018

Page 12 of 12