Case Details

Citation(s)
1992 SLD 746 = 1992 CLC 280
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No.1207 of 1971, heard on 11th June, 1991.
Presented By: Before Malik Muhammad Qayyum, J
Abdur Rehman Cheema and Ch. Mushtaq Ahmad Khan for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents.

IHSAN ULLAH LAMBARDAR --- Petitioner

VERSUS

MEMBER,       BOARD       OF       REVENUE       and others---Respondents

Law: Colonization of Government Lards (Punjab) Act (V of 1912)

Section: 10

Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act (V of 1912)--- ----S.  10---Pedigree  Live  Stock  Breeding Scheme---Allotment of State land on lease under the Scheme, cancellation of---State land duly allotted on lease under Pedigree Live Stock Scheme to petitioner/allottee who was a Lambardar, subsequently was cancelled on the ground that land being situated within prescribed limits could not have been allotted to petitioner---Authority cancelling allotment of petitioner had directed that petitioner be allotted some other land not falling within prescribed limits----Notification issued subsequent to allotment of land in favour of petitioner having provided that ban on allotment of State land situated within one mile of Municipal limits, was not applicable in cases of Lambardars---On strength of that Notification, allotment made in favour of petitioner who was a Lambardar, could not have been cancelled. Abdur Rehman Cheema and Ch. Mushtaq Ahmad Khan for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing: 11th June, 1991.   JUDGMENT The petitioner claims to be a Lambardar of Chak No. 186 Tehsil and District Faisalabad. He was allotted land on lease under the Pedigree Live Stock Scheme on 3rd of April, 1971. This allotment of the petitioner was challenged by respondent No.3 by filing an appeal before the Commissioner who accepted it on the ground that the land being situated within the prescribed limits could not have been allotted to the petitioner. He on 15th June, 1971 cancelled the allotment in favour of the petitioner and directed that he be allotted some other land not falling within the prescribed limits. This order was assailed by the petitioner by…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register