1996 PLP 750 (MLD)
GHULAM RASOOL and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1996 PLP 750 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Board of Revenue Punjab |
| Bench Members | Raza Ali, Member (Colonies) |
| Parties | GHULAM RASOOL and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | West Pakistan Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1996 PLP 750 (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 1996 PLP 750 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Board of Revenue Punjab bench comprising: Raza Ali, Member (Colonies).
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1996 PLP 750 (MLD) (GHULAM RASOOL and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Malik Talib Hussain Awan for Petitioners.
- Date of hearing: 19th July, 1995
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S.163‑‑‑Colonization' of Government Lands (Punjab) Act (V of 1912), S.10‑‑‑Grant of lease‑‑‑Resumption‑‑‑Land in dispute was leased out to petitioners/lessees under 15 years' lease scheme, but petitioner having failed to pay rent of leased land and also having failed to bring that land to the extent of 90 % under cultivation, same was resumed by Collector‑‑‑Non‑cultivation of leased land to the required extent and also non‑payment of arrears of Lagan, being rectifiable, Board of Revenue, after receiving order of resumption, restored lease to petitioners/lessees condoning lapse with penalty.
Judgment & Decree
Malik Talib Hussain Awan for Petitioners. Date of hearing: 19th July, 1995 These are three review petitions against the order, dated 30‑3‑1995 and 15‑5‑1995 of Member (J‑III), in R.O.R. Nos. 1395/1994, 1369/1994 and 1370/1994, whereby the order of the Additional Commissioner, dated 30‑6‑1992 was upheld and appeals of the petitioners were dismissed being time‑barred. The facts in all the tree cases are that the land in dispute was leased out to the petitioners under the 15 Years Leases Scheme. The petitioners failed to pay the rent and the land was not brought to the extent of 90% under cultivation. The AC/Collector, Lodhran resumed the land in dispute on 25‑3‑1981 accordingly. The petitioners alongwith others lessees filed Writ Petition in the Lahore High Court and after decision of High Court the petitioners filed appeal before the Additional Commissioner, who dismissed the same on the point of limitation, vide order, dated 26‑11‑1992. Petitioners filed revision petitions R.O.R. Nos. 1395/94, 1369/94 and 1370/94 which were also dismissed on 15‑5‑1995 and 30‑3‑1995. Hence these review petitions.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that both the lower Courts have passed orders without consulting the record, the land was resumed without issuing notices to the petitioners and non‑cultivation or non- payment of rent are rectifiable breaches.
4. In these cases both the breaches i.e. non‑cultivation of the disputed land to the required extent and non‑payment of arrears of Lagan are rectifiable. I therefore condone the lapse with a penalty of Rs.5,000 each and restore the lease in favour of the petitioners extending the same up to Rabi 1998. The petitioners should deposit all the arrears of Lagan with the penalty of Rs.5,000 each within three months enabling themselves to apply for the grant of proprietary rights under the new Scheme of 1995. With the above observations all the three review petitions are accepted and the orders of lower Courts and the orders under review are modified accordingly. M.B.A./40/Rev. Revision petitions accepted.