2012 PLP 712 (CLC)
FATEH SHER — Petitioner Versus DISTRICT COORDINATION OFFICER,
| Citation | 2012 PLP 712 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | FATEH SHER — Petitioner Versus DISTRICT COORDINATION OFFICER, |
| Primary Law | Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act (V of 1912) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2012 PLP 712 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act (V of 1912) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2012 PLP 712 (CLC)?
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: 2012 PLP 712 (CLC) (FATEH SHER — Petitioner Versus DISTRICT COORDINATION OFFICER,). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Abdul Rehman Khan Laskani for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 10
Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199
Constitutional petition
Leasing out land for fixed period
Land in question was leased out to father of the petitioner for the crops of Kharif 1988 and Rabi 1989
Contentions of the petitioner were that after enjoying the lease of two crops, he had a right to perpetually possess and cultivate the land in question and that petitioner was being dispossessed and land was being resumed without serving of any notice to him
Contentions were repelled as land in question was leased out for fixed period in an open auction and fixation of duration of two crops specified the terms of possession of the petitioner and after the elapse of said period, the petitioner would be deemed to be a trespasser under the civil as well as criminal law
Any extension in the lease could be effected through an open auction only where the others desiring to have it on lease would have an equal chance of success
High Court could not contribute to wrong and bestow it the perpetuity
Trespasser was always at notice that he would have vacated the land
Constitutional petition was dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
IJAZ AHMAD, J.
In an auction held on 18-4-1988, the land in question was leased out to Manzoor Ahmad son of Adil, the father of the petitioner for the crops of Kharif 1988 and Rabi 1989, vide order dated 29-10-1989, passed by the Collector/Assistant Commissioner, Vehari.
2. Contends that the land in question is still in the occupation of the petitioner and now the respondents, acting under sections 32 and 34 of the Colonization of Lands Act, 1912, want to dispossess the petitioner. Further contends that after enjoying the lease of two crops, the petitioner has a right to perpetually possess and cultivate the land in question. It is contended that the petitioner is being dispossessed and the land is being resumed without serving any notice to him.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also gone through the record.
4. The land was given on lease to the father of the petitioner for `Kharif' 1988 and 'Rabi' 1989 in an open auction. The fixation of duration of two crops specifies the term of petitioner's possession. After the elapse of the term, the petitioner will be deemed to be a trespasser under the civil as well as criminal law. Any extension in the lease period can be effected through an open auction only where the others desiring to have it on lease will have on equal chance of success. Illegal occupation is a mental disease. If allowed to continue, it becomes an epidemic in gravity and contagious in character. This Court cannot contribute to this wrong and cannot bestow it the perpetuity. As far the contention that the petitioner has not been served any notice is concerned, it suffices to say that a squatter and trespasser are always at notice that they have to vacate this land. These people in fact collaborate with the revenue authorities. They are advised to obtain an ad interim injunctive order in the last days of the each term. The squatters and the officials enrich themselves. The treasury is hollowed. The illegal occupation continues. This petition has no merit. It is hereby, dismissed with a cost of Rs.1000/-. Copies of this order be sent to all the concerned authorities. They shall ensure that the illegal occupants are ejected and the vacated land is put to an open auction for lease in future. H.B.T./F-24/L Petition dismissed.