Case Details

Citation(s)
1999 SLG 911 1999 SLD 911 1999 CLC 990
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No.7067 of 1998, heard on 16-12-1998
MUHAMMAD NASIM CHAUDHRY, J
Malik Ijaz Hussain Ghorcha for Petitioner. Syed Zulfiqar Ali Bokhari, Asstt. A.G. for
Respondents Nos. 1 and 2. Zafar Iqbal Chohan for
Respondent No. 3

NAZAR MUHAMMAD

VS

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BHAKKAR and 2 others

Law:

Section:

(a) West Pakistan Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967)----S. 42---Mutation, sanction of---Appeal---Revenue Officer, being either Tehsildar or a Naib-Tehsildar can sanction a mutation---Appeal against order of a Revenue Officer---Competency---Where an order is passed by an Assistant Collector of either grade, the appeal is competent before ' the Collector, but the same is competent before the Commissioner when the order is passed by a Collector---Appeal against the order of the Commissioner is preferred before the Board of Revenue, only on a point of law. (b) West Pakistan Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967)--- ----S. 161---Mutation, sanction of---Review---Competency---Power of District Collector/Deputy Commissioner regarding vires of a mutation sanctioned by Revenue Officer, as such the District Collector/Deputy Commissioner under S.161, Land Revenue Act, 1967 stands eclipsed therefrom and vires of a mutation sanctioned by a Revenue Officer cannot be analysed, dissected and considered by the District Collector. (c) West Pakistan Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967)--- ----Ss. 42 & 161---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Mutation, cancellation of---Review by Deputy Commissioner of a mutation, sanctioned by a Revenue Officer---Validity---Mutation was sanctioned in favour of petitioner, an appeal was preferred by respondent, against mutation before Assistant Commissioner/Collector---During pendency of appeal order of Revenue Officer regarding mutation was reviewed by Deputy Commissioner/ District Collector and mutation was cancelled---Validity---Although Deputy Commissioner of a District was the representative of State, yet he could not project his powers beyond substantive and procedural law of the Province--­Deputy Commissioner could review his own order or that of his predecessor in accordance with law and not that of his subordinates including Revenue Officer---Deputy Commissioner/District Collector had no jurisdiction to entertain any application and to pass any order against that of a Revenue Officer regarding sanction of a mutation---Order of Deputy Commissioner was coram non judice in circumstances. JUDGMENT One Paujdar son of…
🔒
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