1990 PLP 225 (SCMR)

‑‑‑S.10‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)‑‑‑Plaintiffs suit for declaration regarding subsistence and continuance of lease in his favour; dismissed‑‑‑Main consideration which weighed with Departmental Authorities and subsequently the Courts, was that plaintiff at the time of allotment was minor‑‑‑Board of Revenue in a similar case subsequent to the decision in present case, had taken a contrary view on the question relating to minority of allottee‑‑ Leave to appeal was granted to examine questions apart from question of contrary view taken by Board of Revenue, whether under the relevant law it was not possible for a minor to obtain allotment of land under Grow More Food Scheme, and thereafter, either to fulfil the conditions if he was physically fit to do so notwithstanding his minority or to engage help to do the needful and in any case to act through his guardian ad litem as his agent and whether in case there was any departmental instruction or a rule or stipulation in a scheme which prohibts a minor to do all aforesaid things, it would not be ultra vires the other legal provisions relating to the acts and competency of a minor. Ch. Muhammad Ashraf, Advocate instructed by Rana Maqbool Ahmad Qadri, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondents. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑Leave to appeal bas been sought, against the dismissal by the High Court of petitioner's civil revision. His suit for declaration regarding subsistence and continuance of a lease in his favour of State land under Grow More Food Scheme, was dismissed. He having failed in appeal and Civil Revision has now sought leave to appeal. The main consideration which weighed with the Departmental Authorities and subsequently the Courts, was that the petitioner at the time of the allotment, was a minor. Learned counsel has relied on the decision of Board of Revenue in a similar case 5 years subsequent to the decision in the present case, taking a contrary view on the question relating to the minority of the allottee. Apart from this point, it would need examination whether, under the relevant law it was not possible for a minor to obtain allotment of land under Grow More Food Scheme. And thereafter either to fulfil the conditions if he is physically fit to do so notwithstanding his minority or to engage help to do the needful and in any case to act through his guardian ad‑liters as his agent. A further question would need examination; whether, in case there is any departmental instruction or a rule or stipulation in a Scheme which prohibits a minor to do all this it will not be ultra vires the other legal provisions relating to the acts and comptency of a minor. These and other related questions as also those raised in this petition, require examination. Leave to appeal accordingly is granted. Security for each Rs.5,

000. It shall be prepared on the present record with direction to the parties to file all additional documents which would be necessary for disposal of the appeal. Status quo to continue. A.A./M‑1070/S Leave granted.