1994 PLP 1220 (MLD)
SADIQ and others — Petitioners Versus MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE and others — Respondents ,
| Citation | 1994 PLP 1220 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | SADIQ and others — Petitioners Versus MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE and others — Respondents , |
| Primary Law | West Pakistan Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994 PLP 1220 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: West Pakistan Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1994 PLP 1220 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1994 PLP 1220 (MLD) (SADIQ and others — Petitioners Versus MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE and others — Respondents ,). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Muhammad Wasi Zafar for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
S.164
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199
Constitutional petition-- Petitioners had challenged order of Member, Board of Revenue allotting land in dispute in favour of respondent
Main grievance of petitioners was that they had already moved Member, Board of Revenue for cancellation of disputed land from name of respondent allottee which application was sent to Deputy Commissioner, but matter was unnecessarily being prolonged
Petitioners contended that enquiry was complete and in case early decision was not taken by M.B.R. petitioners would suffer immensely especially when all reports wer6 complete and case was ripe for decision
High Court directed Deputy Commissioner to submit report to M.B.R. within specified period and thereafter M.B.R. would dispose of application of petitioner within a month after hearing parties.
Judgment & Decree
In this Constitutional petition the petitioners have challenged action of respondent No.1 Member, Board of Revenue allotting the disputed land in favour of respondent No.4 Rab Nawaz son of Mir Muhammad.
2. Pre-admission notice was sent and in pursuance thereof Abdul Sattar, Head Clerk Litigation Office of respondent No. 2 is present.
3. The main grievance of the petitioners is that they have already moved to the M.B.R for the cancellation of the disputed land from the name of respondent No. which application was sent to the Deputy Commissioner vide Memo. No.3348~92/2291-CLII, dated 28th October, 1992 but the matter is unnecessarily being prolonging. It is further stated by the learned counsel that the enquiry is complete and in case early decision is trot taken by respondent No. 1, the petitioners will suffer immensely. It is also stated by the learned counsel that all the reports are complete and the case is ripe for decision. In view of this the learned Deputy Commissioner respondent No.2 is directed to '4 submit the report to respondent as already directed by the later within 15 days and thereafter respondent No.1 will dispose of the application of the petitioner within a month after hearing the concerned parties. In view of this the writ petition is disposed of. H.B.T./S-429/L Order accordingly