Case Details

Citation(s)
1986 SLG 549 1986 SLD 549 1986 SCMR 622
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. 432 of 1985, in Civil Petition for. Special Leave to Appeal No. 631 of 1977,doecided on 20-11-1985.
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH AND ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, 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

UMRA-

VS

ALLAH YAR and 51 others

Law:

Section:

(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)-----Art. 185(3)--Consolidation of land--Leave to appeal granted to consider whether while remanding case, Member, Board of Revenue acted in accordance with law by affecting rights of petitioner in property. (b) Natural justice, principles of-----Consolidation of land--Appellants rights in property affected without giving him a chance of hearing--Order impugned being in violation of principles of natural justice, set aside and case remanded for fresh decision in accordance with law. S.M. Almas, Advocate Supreme Court and Tanveer Ahmad, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Qazi Umar Aziz, Advocate Supreme Court and Chughtai, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents. Date of hearing: 20th November, 1985. JUDGMENT ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, J.--Facts of this case briefly stated are that consolidation scheme of Mauza Mukhiana, Tehsil and District Jhang, was confirmed by the Assistant Commissioner/ Collector (Consolidation) on 25-2-1971. Respondents 1 to 12 herein filed an appeal before the Additional Commissioner (Consolidation), Sargodha, against 50 persons, including Umra petitioner. The appeal was partly accepted by the Additional Commissioner by the order, dated 17-6-1971, and as regards petitioner, it was clarified in the order that "as there is no direct dispute between Umra respondent and Allah Yar appellant, the Wanda of Umra respondent should not be touched upon by the A.C.O." 2. On remand the Collector (Consolidation) as well as the Additional Commissioner (Consolidation) on appeal did not affect the scheme of the petitioner, in fact he was not even made a party to the appellate proceedings. However, finally respondents 1 and 10 filed a revision application before Member, Board of Revenue in which petitioner was cited as respondent 38. Learned Member, Board of Revenue partly heard the revision application on 2-8-1977 and as petitioner was not a party before the Additional Commissioner nor his Wanda was affected, learned Member deleted petitioners name from the list of respondents on that day. Finally, learned Member heard the revision petition on 2-8-1977 and by the order passed that day he remanded the case to the Collector…
🔒
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