Law: Punjab Board of Revenue Act, 1957

Section: 8

Punjab Board of Revenue Act (XI of 1957)---S. 8---Board of Revenue (‘the Board’)---Power of review---Scope---Jurisdiction to review a judicial order is conferred by law---Power to review in Revenue jurisdiction is vested in the Board of Revenue by S. 8 of the Punjab Board of Revenue Act, 1957---Suo motu power to review does not vest in the Board of Revenue. Member (Colonies) Board of Revenue Punjab, Lahore and others v. Muhammad Shafi and others 2008 SCMR 589 ref. ORDER: MUSHIR ALAM, JUSTICE:---.--- Present petition arises out of the judgment dated 13.01.2016 passed in W.P. No.6635 of 2009 by Lahore High Court, Lahore whereby the writ Petition was dismissed and the order dated 12.3.2009 on Review Petition, passed by the Member (Consolidation) Board of Revenue, Punjab granting Review petition filed by the Respondents Nos.5 to 7 was maintained. 2. Instant proceeding arises out of Consolidation proceedings in respect of Mauza Beriwala, Tehsil and District Hafizabad, was confirmed by the Consolidation Officer on 25.3.1981. It appears that the dispute as to consolidation of subject land, shuttled to and forth by and between the parties and ultimately learned bench of the Lahore High Court in Writ Petition No. 8019/89 at the motion of the present Petitioner remanded the Revision Petition (ROR No. 985/85) vide judgment dated 21.11.2000 (pages 65-69) to the learned Member (Consolidation) Board of Revenue (in short M (C) BOR) for decision. 3. On remand, the learned M (C) BOR) in consideration of the fact that the parties have conceded for adjustment of their respective lands in terms of Resolution No.24, which was duly signed and thumb marked by the parties in settlement proceedings (Resolution No.24 available at page 99 of the file and better copy of page 100). The Revision Petition was decided accordingly, vide order dated 18.8.2005 (available at page 58 of the file). The M (C) BOR in paragraphs 7 to 10 of the order 18.8.2005 considered the resolution 24 in detail and in Para 10 it was concluded as follows: From the above discussed ResolutionsiI, it is clearly established that the respondents had willingly accepted deficiency of 40 Kanals 8 Marla in their entitlement…

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