P L D 1957 W (PLP)
MUHAMMAD YUSEF‑Appellant Versus SARANG‑Respondent
| Citation | P L D 1957 W (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD YUSEF‑Appellant Versus SARANG‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1957 W (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 1957 W (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1957 W (PLP) (MUHAMMAD YUSEF‑Appellant Versus SARANG‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Karam Elahi Chohan for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 211‑Order passed by Revenue Officer exercising powers of Commissioner Whether Commissioner has jurisdiction to revise that order.
Judgment & Decree
On behalf of the appellant, it is contended inter alia that the Commissioner's order in this case is without jurisdiction as it tends to modify the order of the Revenue Officer, Barrage, who already exercises the appellate powers of a Commissioner in the Barrage Area. The Commissioner's order has dealt with two aspects of the case :‑ (i) It modifies the order No. R/‑1127, dated the 24th January 1955, of the Deputy Commissioner, Hyderabad disas A. G. signing the land under village 'Sarmast Laghari' (Area 45‑35) A. G. and village 'Dalwani' (Area 27‑19) to the extent that it holds that an area of about ten acres from village 'Sarmast Laghari' marked LMNOP on the sketch at page 34 of the correspondence of the Revenue Officer's office and an area of about four acres marked ABCD on the same sketch should not be considered as disassigned and that only the remaining area should be considered disassigned and available for dispoal for agricultural purposes ; and (ii) It revokes the grant made by the Assistant Revenue Officer, Left Bank, and maintained by the Revenue Officer, Barrage, under his No. APB‑11648, dated the 3rd September 1955, in favour of the appellant, directing that the remaining area should be disposed of by the Revenue Officer in accordance with the policy of Government in this behalf. I find that the Commissioner's order was not without jurisdiction in so far as (i) is concerned. Under section 211 Sind Land Revenue Code, 1879, he was competent to do this. I, therefore, see no reason to interfere with this part of the Commissioner's order. As regards (u), I find there is substance in the contention of the appellant that the Commissioner's order was without jurisdiction. I, therefore, uphold his appeal on this ground without going into the merits of the case, Thus the order of the Revenue Officer dated the 3rd September 1955, shall be considered effective except as modified by the modification to the disassignment order No. R/‑1127, dated the 24th January 1955, of the Deputy Commissioner, Hyderabad, Respondent Sarang, should be informed that he has a right to appeal to the Board of Revenue against the order of the Revenue Officer dated the 3rd September 1955 and that, for the purpose of filing such an appeal, the period of 90 days will count from the date of this order. K. M. A. Appeal accepted.