Case Details

Citation(s)
2014 SLG 1440 2014 SLD 1440 2014 SCMR 1187
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition No.610-L of 2011, decided on 1st April, 2014. (Against the order dated 3-2-2011 passed by the Lahore High Court in W.P. No.6485 of 2007)
JAWWAD S. KHAWAJA AND IJAZ AHMED CHAUDHRY, JJ

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through A.D. Fisheries Sialkot

VS

Rana ABDUL HAMEED and others

Law:

Section:

Land Acquisition Act (I of 1894)-------Ss. 4 & 17---Land acquisition proceedings---Revenue department and forums, jurisdiction of---Revenue hierarchy did not feature anywhere in the land acquisition proceedings---No court /forum within the revenue hierarchy could, therefore, set aside the acquisition of land or orders passed including notifications under Ss. 4 & 17 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Shahid Mubeen, Additional A.-G. and Mrs. Azeem Zia, Assistant Director, Fisheries for Petitioner. Jarirullah Khan, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondent No.1 along with Respondent in person. Date of hearing: 1st April, 2014. ORDER JAWWAD S. KHAWAJA, J.---We have heard this petition at length today and had also heard the case earlier. The petition arises out of land acquisition proceedings whereby land measuring 5 kanals, 18 marlas was acquired pursuant to a notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act issued as far back as 21-1-1975. The litigation in this case has been long drawn out and the parties have been contesting their respective claims/positions before various forums such as the revenue forums, the Civil Court and the High Court. 2. The petition, however, can easily be disposed of on the basis of a very basic and fundamental question which has arisen in the matter. The land was acquired, as noted above, under the Land Acquisition Act. The respondent whose father was the land owner remained dormant for many years but then in 1993 filed a civil suit. It was his case inter alia, that firstly, the land should not have been acquired, secondly, even if it was acquired, the same should be returned to him because he was in possession thereof and thirdly, because the Province/Fisheries Department owned excess land including nazool land which could have been utilized for the purpose of setting up a fish seed hatchery/nursery by the Fisheries Department of the Province. It is somewhat unfortunate that the revenue department assumed jurisdiction and proceeded to deal with the matter as if it was a question arising within the jurisdiction of the revenue forums. This clearly was an erroneous premise…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492