1994 PLP 1668 (SCMR)

(On appeal from the judgment dated 25‑4‑1993 passed by a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, in Writ Petition No. 153‑D of 1985). Salt Miner Service and Conduct Regulation, 1976‑‑‑ ‑‑‑R. 4‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Entitlement to hold miner book of deceased miner‑‑‑Cause of action had arisen on the death of miner when petitioner was admittedly in Government service‑‑‑Petitioner and respondent were both nephew of deceased miner in the same degree‑‑ Petitioner, being in 'Government service, transfer of miner book to him by Trial Court ignoring respondent was not proper exercise of jurisdiction by it‑‑‑Trial Court's decision was reversed in appeal whereby Appellate Court found that respondent was entitled to hold the miner book and such decision was upheld by the High Court‑‑‑Petitioner had not been able to point out any infirmity or legal error in the impugned judgments justifying interference by Supreme Court‑‑‑Leave to appeal was refused in circumstances. JUDGMENT MUHAMMAD RAFIQ TARAR, J.‑‑‑Muhammad Bakhsh petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court dated 25‑4‑1993 whereby his revision petition against the judgment and decree passed by the learned District Judge was dismissed. The finding of the Civil Court that the petitioner herein was entitled to hold the miner book of Fazal Ilahi deceased was reversed in appeal by the learned District Judge who found the respondent entitled to hold the same.

2. Rule 4 of the Salt Miner Service and Conduct Regulation, 1976 governs the transfer of the miner book. The relevant provision is reproduced below:‑ "(i) ..................................... (ii) On the death of a miner his book shall be given to one of the following relations in the order named provided the man is able‑bodied, of good character and capable of working in the mine; (a) ..................................... (b) ..................................... (c) a brother who does not possess a book of his own and who undertakes with the widow's concurrence to support the deceased miner's family; (d) ..................................... (e) .. .................................. (f) a nephew on the condition mentioned in (c) above." There is no dispute that the petitioner and respondent No. 1 are nephews of Fazal Ilahi deceased miner in the same degree. The learned appellate and Revisional Courts held that the cause of action had arisen on the death of deceased miner Fazal Ilahi when the petitioner was admittedly in Government service, therefore, it was not proper exercise of jurisdiction to transfer the miner book to him ignoring respondent No.

1. It was further observed that the impression gained by the trial Court .that there .was another miner book in the family of Muhammad Jan respondent was not correct as the admitted position was that the other miner book was owned by Muhammad Hanif a cousin of both the parties. The learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to point out any infirmity or legal effort in the impugned judgments justifying interference by this Court. This petition is, therefore, dismissed. AA./M‑1930/S Leave refused.