Case Details

Citation(s)
2010 SLG 1220 2010 SLD 1220 2010 YLR 101
Lahore High Court
Civil Revision Nos. 338 and 339-D of 2000, heard on 07-05-2009.
PERVAIZ INAYAT MALIK, JUSTICE
Sardar Riaz Kareem for Petitioner. Mubashar Latif Gill, Asstt. A.G. for
Respondent No.1. Muhammad Ramzan Khalid Joyia for
Respondent No.2.

DILDAR AHMAD

VS

PROVINCE OF PUNJAB

Law: West Pakistan Land Revenue Act, (XVII of 1967)

Section: 163(2)(b)

(a) West Pakistan Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967)--- ----S. 163(2)(b)--- Allotment under temporary cultivation scheme's were allotted land under temporary cultivation scheme during the year 1962 on lease which was not subsequently extended to thens recoursed to Revenue Department for remedy which declined to interfere with the orders approached the Trial Court and their suit was dismissed---Appellate Court too dismissed appeals on the subject-matter---Contention of the petitioners in revision was that no extension of lease was required because the Government, in categorical terms in a notification had held that extension in lease rights was applicable to six years prior to year 1993 and it stood automatically expired and that since the lease rights were given to the petitioners not treating him/them as temporary, therefore, requirement of extension after five years was not correct--Validity---Record revealed that land in question was allotted to the petitioners for tube-well sinking schemes which under the law could not be allotted to the petitioners under temporary cultivation scheme whereunder extension of time lease was required---Impugned orders by Trial Court and the Appellate Court were well-reasoned and in accordance with law---High Court upheld concurrent findings of the courts below. (b) Administration of justice--- ----Policy making---Interference--Scope---Policy making is within the exclusive domain of the executive which, in normal course, cannot be interfered by courts unless the same is in conflict either with some provisions of law of the land or against the provisions of Constitution. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: PERVAIZ INAYAT MALIK, J.- Since in both the revision petitions common questions of law and facts are involved, therefore, through this single judgment I intend to dispose of both these petitions. 2. Briefly stated facts as those emerge out of this petition are that the petitioners were allotted certain lands against cultivation scheme during the year 1962 on lease, which were not subsequently extended. Feeling aggrieved whereof they approached authorities in the Revenue Department and after remaining unsuccess ful therefrom they filed…
🔒
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