1989 PLP 1457 (SCMR)
GHULAM HUSSAIN SHAH‑‑Petitioner Versus MEMBER (COLONIES), BOARD OF REVENUE, PUNJAB and Others‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1989 PLP 1457 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Usman Ali Shah and Ali Hussain Qazilbash, JJ |
| Parties | GHULAM HUSSAIN SHAH‑‑Petitioner Versus MEMBER (COLONIES), BOARD OF REVENUE, PUNJAB and Others‑‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 1457 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 1457 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Usman Ali Shah and Ali Hussain Qazilbash, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 1457 (SCMR) (GHULAM HUSSAIN SHAH‑‑Petitioner Versus MEMBER (COLONIES), BOARD OF REVENUE, PUNJAB and Others‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Syed Asghar Hussain Sabzwari, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 10th April 1989.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the order of the Lahore High Court, dated 27‑10‑1987, passed in Writ Petition No.1424 of 1987). Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act (V of 1912) ‑‑‑Ss.10 & 19‑A‑‑Horse Breeding Scheme‑‑Succession‑‑Dispute between two brothers over succession in respect of land under Horse Breeding Scheme‑ Petitioner was an employee of Government Transport Service and remained on duty whereas respondent had left service before the death of his father and was assisting him in cultivation of lands‑‑Respondent was also a permanent resident of relevant Chak‑‑Contention of petitioner that he was an ex‑serviceman and had to be given preference over respondent under the circular by Board of Revenue would not prevail with the Supreme Court as such contention was not raised before the lower Tribunal but was raised for the first time before the Supreme Court‑‑Supreme Court declined interference.
Judgment & Decree
ALI HUSSAIN QAZILBASH, J.‑‑In this petition for leave to appeal, the order of a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, dated 27‑10‑1987, has been impugned.
2. The dispute between the two brothers is over the succession in respect of certain lands under the Horse Breeding Scheme, on lease basis. The District Remount Officer proposed lease in favour of respondent No.5 as per his letter, dated 21‑9‑1984. The District Collector, Multan, after hearing the petitioner who was a rival claimant, allowed the proposal made to him and allotted the lease to respondent No.5 vide his order, dated 27‑1‑1985. The petitioner filed an appeal before the Commissioner, Multan Division, Multan, which was dismissed on 22‑9‑1985, his revision was turned down by the Member (Colonies), Board of ` Revenue, Punjab, Lahore, on 10‑12‑1986 and his writ petition was also dismissed by the Multan Bench of the Lahore High Court through the impugned order.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at some length and we have not been able to find any fault with the findings of the lower Tribunals. Admittedly the petitioner is an employee of the G.T.S. and remains on duty whereas respondent No.5 had deft the service before the death of his father and was assisting him in cultivating the lands. Furthermore, the respondent is a permanent resident of Chak No.34/10‑R.. The contention of the learned counsel 1A for the petitioner that the petitioner was an ex‑serviceman and had to be given preference over respondent No.5 as per the circular of the Board of Revenue would not prevail with us in that this question was not raised before the lower Tribunals and has been raised for the first time in this Court. 4. ‑ Thus finding no force in the petition, the same is dismissed. M.B.A./G-182/S Petition dismissed.