LAHORE, June 23: The Punjab Board of Revenue on Monday informed the Lahore High Court that it had allotted agriculture land to some 62 senior army officers, including President Gen Pervez Musharraf, in Cholistan and other districts of the Punjab from time to time on the requisition of the GHQ.

The information was furnished by the BoR while responding to a petition of M.D. Tahir who had alleged that over 100 army officers had been allotted land at significantly lower rates in different districts of the Punjab. He had requested the court to take notice of such allotments and proceed against both the BoR and the allottees.

The BoR submitted that there were 62 senior and 56 junior army officers who had been allotted land at a rate of Rs60 per unit under four allotment schemes issued by the Punjab government, on the requisition of the GHQ. As claimed by the board, Gen Musharraf, Gen Aziz Khan and former interior minister Gen Moinuddin Haider were among the allottees.

However, the board showed inability to disclose the exact measurement of the area allotted to the army officers and the names of the corresponding allottees saying it had no concern with that. “Only the GHQ can furnish this information since the board has been simply complying with the government instructions regarding allotment which was made under Section 10(3) of the Colonization of Government Land Act,” the board gave the reply.

The board claimed to have allotted land to the army officers also under the Army Welfare Scheme.

It was further stated that the Punjab government had made allotment schemes for army officers during 1981, 1994, 1997 and 1999. While giving details of the allotment rates, the BoR claimed that under the 1981 scheme, the land was allotted at a rate of Rs50 per ‘unit’ with eight per cent surcharge. In 1994, the rate increased to Rs60 with surcharge increasing up to 30 per cent. The same rates prevailed in 1997 scheme, while in 1999 the allotment rates lowered to Rs40 per unit with a decreased surcharge of 13 per cent.

The entire allotment was made in accordance with the law as it was fully covered under the four allotment schemes and no violation took place on the part of the BoR.

Further proceedings will resume on the next date of hearing when both the parties will argue the case at length.