| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1991 SLG 443 1991 SLD 443 1991 PLD 531 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeals Nos.10 of 1986, 458 of 1987 and 28 of 1988, decision dated: 4-03-1991. (From the judgments/orders of Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, dated 28-10-1987 passed in Writ Petitions Nos. 1181 and 744 of 1986 respectively)
NASIM HASAN SHAH, SHAFIUR RAHMAN AND ABDUL QADEER CHAUDHRY, JJ
Abdul Hakim Kundi, Advocate Supreme Court and Jan Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Appellant (in Civil Appeal No. 10 of 1986). Ch. Muhammad Ashraf Wallah, Advocate Supreme Court and Mahmood A. Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Appella
Civil Appeals Nos.10 of 1986, 458 of 1987 and 28 of 1988, decision dated: 4-03-1991. (From the judgments/orders of Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, dated 28-10-1987 passed in Writ Petitions Nos. 1181 and 744 of 1986 respectively)
NASIM HASAN SHAH, SHAFIUR RAHMAN AND ABDUL QADEER CHAUDHRY, JJ
Abdul Hakim Kundi, Advocate Supreme Court and Jan Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Appellant (in Civil Appeal No. 10 of 1986). Ch. Muhammad Ashraf Wallah, Advocate Supreme Court and Mahmood A. Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Appella
Civil Appeal No.10 of 1986 Haji NOORWAR JAN
VS
SENIOR MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE, N.W.F.P. PESHAWAR and 4 others Civil Appeals Nos. 458 of 1987 and 28 of 1988 MUHAMMAD YUNIS and another vs MEMBER (REVENUE), BOARD OF REVENUE, PUNJAB, LAHORE and 7 othe
Law:
Section:
(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)-- ----Art. 199---West Pakistan Land Revenue Rules, 1968, R.19 (2) (b)---Error of law apparent on the face of the record---Constitutional jurisdiction, exercise of---Provincial Board of Revenue at the apex of the Revenue hierarchy was charged with the statutory duty of interpreting the laws, applying the same to individual cases coming up before it and laying down the law for the subordinates in the hierarchy to follow---Any error on the part of Board of Revenue in understanding the law, in applying it or in laying down the law can and must be corrected in the Constitutional jurisdiction, for if it is left uncorrected, it will result in subverting the rule of law. Abdul Wahid v. Member, Board of Revenue, Punjab, Lahore and another 1971 SCMR 719; Muhammad Shari v. Member (Revenue), Board of Revenue, Punjab, Lahore and 2 others 1972 SCMR 253; Muhammad Warrayam v. Member, Board of Revenue, Punjab, Lahore and 3 ethers 1972 SCMR 354; Ghulam Hussain v. Ghulam Muhammad and another 1976 SCMR 75; Sharaf Din v. Qazi Abdul Jalil and another 1986 SCMR 1368; Utility Stores Corporation of Pakistan Limited v. Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal and others PLD 1987 SC 447 and Chairman, Regional Transport Authority, Rawalpindi v. Pakistan Mutual Insurance Company Limited, Rawalpindi PLD 1991 SC 14 ref. Jurisdiction and Illegality by Ammon Rubinstein, Chap. V and Rahim Shah v. Chief Election Commissioner of Pakistan and another PLD 1973 SC 24 rel. (b) West Pakistan Land Revenue Rules, 1968-- ----R. 19 (2) (b)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199---Lambardar, selection of---Constitutional jurisdiction, exercise of---Selection of the Lambardar is the executive responsibility of the Revenue Officers with the Board of Revenue at the apex---After the error of law in the of the Member, Board of Revenue had been corrected by High Court in its Constitutional jurisdiction, it would be for the Board of Revenue to decide afresh the revision brought before it in accordance with law. JUDGMENT SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J: --These three appeals raise a common question of law, namely, the powers of the High Court while exercising constitutional jurisdiction under…
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