P L D 1961 W P (Rev (PLP)
IBRAHIM‑Petitioner Versus AHSAN ALI‑Respondent
| Citation | P L D 1961 W P (Rev (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | |
| Bench Members | Nasir Ahmad, Member, Board of Revenue, |
| Parties | IBRAHIM‑Petitioner Versus AHSAN ALI‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1961 W P (Rev (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 1961 W P (Rev (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the bench comprising: Nasir Ahmad, Member, Board of Revenue,.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1961 W P (Rev (PLP) (IBRAHIM‑Petitioner Versus AHSAN ALI‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Headnotes / Summary
Lambardar‑appointment‑Three cases of estate considered together‑Appointment of candidate in particular Patti cannot be upset in revision on ground that he had not applied particularly for that Patti.
Judgment & Decree
AHSAN ALI‑Respondent Revision Side No. 181 of 1959‑60, decided on 11th October 1960, District Lahore. Lambardar‑appointment‑Three cases of estate considered together‑Appointment of candidate in particular Patti cannot be upset in revision on ground that he had not applied particularly for that Patti. This revision petition relates to the Lambardari of patti Thakar Singh village Maujoke, District Lahore. Without going into the somewhat long history of this case, it may be mentioned that both the Collector and the Commissioner have concurred in the appointment of the respondent Ahsan Ali. It is argued in this revision petition on behalf of Ibrahim that the main reason which actuated the appiontment of Ahsan Ali was the latter's assertion that he is a Tagga Muslaman and this particular vacancy had been earmarked for a member of that tribe. This assertion of Ahsan Ali, it is urged goes contrary to his statements during the enquiry wherein he had called himself a Rajput. During the course of arguments it came out that the parties' ancestors were converted to Islam and it is not uncommon that after conversion Nau‑Muslim often assume different courtesy surnames, and old tribal designation no longer remain dominant. Anyhow in this particular case the revenue record‑RL‑II‑indicates that the res pondent is a Tagga Muslaman and that is what both the Collector and the Commissioner have accepted as correct. In these circumstances there is no legal issue before me which would justify interference ; though another small matter bas been raised that the respondent did not apply for the Lambardari of this Patti to which he has been appointed. In fact he was one of the candidates for the three Lambardaris which had fallen vacant in this estate, and the cases of all the three Pattis were considered together. In these circumstances the mere fact that he did not apply for this particular Patti is not a very material issue. As a result this revision petition stands dismissed. K. M. A. Petition dismissed.