P L D 2006 Lahore 332 (PLP)

SYED ZAHID HUSSAIN, J.

Order passed by the learned Member, Board of Revenue dated 9-6-2004 is sought to be assailed through this petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. It arises in the circumstances that: Village Bhambool situated in Tehsil Noorpur District Khushab has a large tract of Shamlat land. Civil litigation concerning the same had reached the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan (C.A.No.204/78) which concluded with the judgment of apex Court dated 23-10-1990, incorporating the consensual arrangement between the parties. The matter was then taken up by the Consolidation Officer who prepared a scheme dated 8-4-1991, suggesting a mode of partition. Aggrieved of the same (in particular paragraph No.16 thereof) an appeal was preferred which was accepted by the Additional Commissioner (Consolidation), Sargodha Division Sargodha on 28-8-1995 with the direction to the Consolidation Officer Khushab "to amend the mode or partition in accordance with the order passed by the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan..." This order became subject-matter of revision petition before the Board of Revenue, which petition was accepted by the learned Member (Judicial-I), Board of Revenue Punjab, Lahore on 9-6-2004 who also while setting aside the order of the Additional Commissioner (Consolidation) was of the view that the mode of partition should be amended. The learned counsel for the parties have been heard who have no cavil that the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan dated 23-10-1990 binds the parties and the basis for the partition of Shamlat land should be the said judgment. Suffice it to observe that before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan the mode of partition was agreed to between the parties and the appeal was disposed of accordingly. The relevant part of the judgment is as under:-- "After considerable arguments and discussion amongst the learned counsel in Court both of them ultimately agreed on the following main features and principles:-- (a) That the Triniguzars would for purpose of partition be treated in accordance with the Wajibul Arz entries as owners; (b) If a Triniguzar has already become Khewatdar on account of the Triniguzari entry or Triniguzari right he will be treated as owner amongst Khewatdars and would not any more be treated as Triniguzar so as to get double benefit; (c) If a Triniguzar has not become a Khewatdar and thus is not included as Khewat owner on the basis of his Trini rights he would be treated as an owner on the basis of the Trini rights; and (d) If a Triniguzar has become a Khewatdar on account of any other right including devolution or alienation transfer on any basis other than Trini rights that would not debar him from claiming additional ownership on the basis of Trini rights. Similar other understanding having been reached the learned counsel for the appellants made a statement in writing which was presented to the learned counsel for the respondents for his reply. The said statement and reply in original with corrections has been placed on record. It reads as follows:-- "The appellants/defendants agree that Trini Guzars had the right in accordance with the relevant Revenue Record including the Wajib-ul-arz to be treated as owners but according to the appellants all the respondents/plaintiffs and those whom they represent had become Khewatdars on the basis of the Tirni rights during the last century. Therefore, if they get the land as Khewatdars on the real basis of their being Tirni Guzars once, they should not be entitled and they are not entitled to get any share in Shamlat land separately as Trini Guzars. "Consequently Shamlat land may be partitioned Hasab Rasad Khewat Bandobast 1913-14 and if during this process, the Revenue Authorities come across any Tirni Guzar who is not included in the Khewat-Dars on the basis of Tirni rights, then such person or his successors in interest may be allowed share in Shamlat land according to Zare Tirni paid by him in the year 1891-92". (by counsel for the appellants) "The above proposition should be subject to the condition that appellants admit the correctness of the entry in Wajib-ul-Arz viz. to partition the Shamlat amongst the Khewatdars and Tirni Guzars 1892 or their successors from partition and Tirni Guzars cannot be excluded. Care should be taken that such of Tirni Guzars who have already acquired their due share as Tirni Guzars do not get the same twice over.: (by counsel for the respondents) A sheet of paper (single page) on which these original statements are recorded is signed by both the learned counsel. It is a fair and correct handling of a difficult question by both the learned counsel. This appeal, accordingly, is partly allowed and stands disposed of in terms as stated and reproduced from the 'position expressed in writing by both the learned counsel. The decree shall be corrected/modified accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs." The perusal of the above judgment would leave no manner of doubt that the salient features and principles had been laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. Not only the parties, the statutory functionaries in view of Articles 189 and 190 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 are obliged to be bound by the same which judgment is to be kept in view and the mode of partition should be A in conformity with the same. No deviation whatsoever therefrom can be made by anyone. The wholesome effect of the order passed by the Additional Commissioner (Consolidation) as also the Member, Board of Revenue is that the Consolidation Officer is to amend the scheme who is bound to give effect to the judgment of the Supreme Court. There is a consensus even before this Court that the Consolidation Officer should while devising mode of partition keep in view the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan and give effect to the same. I have A no doubt whatsoever that as statutory functionaries the official respondents while carrying out their statutory functions will act strictly in accordance with the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan and implement the same faithfully. The petition is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs. M.B.A./M-166/L???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Order accordingly.