Law: West Pakistan Consolidation of Holdings Ordinance (VI of 1960)

Section: 10 , 11 , 13

West Pakistan Consolidation of Holdings Ordinance (VI of 1960)--- ----Ss. 10, 11 & 13---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art-199 --- Consolidation of holdings---Material questions raised and argued on behalf of petitioners were not disposed of by Authority below as warranted by law and case was not decided on merits after taking into consideration all points raised before the said Authority-- High Court in exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction set aside order of Authority below and remanded case to decide afresh in accordance with law after hearing parties. Sh. Naveed Shehryar for Petitioners. M. Aslam Butt, Irfan Qadir, AA.-G and M. Akhtar, Addl. A.-G. for Respondents. Date of hearing: 12th February, 1991. JUDGMENT In this case Consolidation Scheme was approved by the Assistant Consolidation Officer on 28-2-1977 on the compromise having been entered into by the parties over the land in question. The respondents challenged the scheme before the learned Collector (Consolidation) Gujrat by riling as appeal before him, which was heard and disposed of by him on 22-9-1977. He introduced certain amendments in the Consolidation Scheme. The petitioners tiled a revision against the said order before learned Additional Commissioner (Con) Gujranwala. He set aside the order of the learned Collector and remanded the case to him for fresh decision. After remand proceedings, ultimately the revision petition of the petitioners was heard and dismissed by the learned Member (C) Board of Revenue on 27-7-1987. Review application of the petitioners was also dismissed by the learned Member vide his order dated 6-3-1988. It is contended by the learned counsel that certain material points were 'raised and argued before learned Member Board of Revenue which were not attended to and no decision thereon was given by him. Learned counsel argues that superior land was taken away from the `Khata' of the petitioners and the said land was allotted to the respondents without any justification. It is argued that consolidation of the holdings of the parties was done on the basis of compromise between them and that this fact of compromise   was not considered by the Revisional…