Case Details

Citation(s)
1987 SLG 267 1987 SLD 267 1987 SCMR 229
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 890 of 1986, decision dated: 22-10-1986.(From the judgment/order, dated 1-10-1986 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, in Writ Petition No. 5092 of 1986)
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH AND S. A. NUSRAT, JJ
Ch. Inayatullah, Advocate Supreme Court and Muhammad Aslam Chaudhry, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents

LAL DIN

VS

MUHAMMAD HABIB and 3 others

Law:

Section:

Constitution of Pakistan (1973)--Arts. 185(3) & 199--Constitutional jurisdiction--High Court loath to substitute its decision for orders of Tribunals below--High Court deciding against tenancy of petitioners and finding that there was misreading and non-consideration of relevant record, remanding case to Board of Revenue for fresh decision in accordance with law--Order passed in favour of petitioner but again set aside in Constitutional jurisdiction--Plea raised that although it was held in impugned that remand order was not followed, in fact High Court had itself allowed that forum to render fresh decision on facts after consideration of record and, therefore, Member Board of Revenue was at liberty to give a decision contrary to findings of High Court--Main question about tenancy having been concluded by rendering a decision by High Court against petitioner which was not challenged any further, said plea was not sustainable--Case was remanded to Board of Revenue because High Court in exercise of its Constitutional jurisdiction was loath to substitute its decision for order of Tribunal below--Petition for leave to appeal dismissed. ORDER MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.-- Leave to appeal has been sought from judgment, dated 1-10-1986 of the Lahore High Court; whereby a Constitutional petition filed by respondent No. 1, was allowed against the petitioner and the orders passed by the Consolidation Authorities regarding possession of the petitioner over disputed land (under consolidation) were set aside as without lawful authority. It is admitted that the land in question was brought under consolidation through a Scheme sanctioned on 10-3-1972. It is also admitted by the learned counsel that under the relevant provisions of the law of consolidation of land holdings, the tenancy of a person as on the date of the sanction of the Scheme would remain in tact and the change of ownership in consolidation proceedings would not make any difference in so far as his character as tenant is concerned. The petitioner claimed that he was tenant under one Karim Bakhsh over the land in question on the said relevant date. His claim was accepted by the Consolidation Authorities. The…
🔒
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