1990 PLP 943 (SCMR)
SIKANDAR KHAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus MEMBER (COLONIES), BOARD OF REVENUE and others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1990 PLP 943 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and S. Usman Ali Shah, JJ |
| Parties | SIKANDAR KHAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus MEMBER (COLONIES), BOARD OF REVENUE and others‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP 943 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1990 PLP 943 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and S. Usman Ali Shah, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP 943 (SCMR) (SIKANDAR KHAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus MEMBER (COLONIES), BOARD OF REVENUE and others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mian Saeed‑ur‑Rehman Farrukh, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Mehdi Khan Mehtab, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Ch. M. Abdul Saleem, Advocate Supreme Court and M. Aslam Chaudhary, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent No. 2.
- Date of hearing: 1st November, 1989.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment, dated 22‑4‑1987 of the Lahore High Court, in Writ Petition No. 900 of 1984). ‑‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Leave to appeal‑‑‑Questions whether High Court in fact non- suited petitioner on grounds independent of considerations which weighed with Board of Revenue; whether grant of petitioner was governed by 1971, 1972 or and other lease scheme; whether original ]case of petitioner was obtained illegally; whether petitioner could not be granted proprietary rights in land in dispute because of alienation of his own land in favour of his heirs and whether petitioner failed to satisfy relevant conditions and other related questions, required examination‑‑‑Leave to appeal was granted.
Judgment & Decree
Ch. M. Abdul Saleem, Advocate Supreme Court and M. Aslam Chaudhary, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent No.
2. Date of hearing: 1st November, 1989. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑‑Leave to appeal has been sought; against the dismissal by the High Court, of petitioner's Constitutional Petition which had arisen out of transfer of proprietary rights in a piece of State land. After hearing the learned counsel from both sides, at some length, we consider it a fit case for grant of leave to appeal, inter alia, for the examination; as to whether, ‑ the High Court in fact non‑suited the petitioner on grounds independent of the considerations which weighed with the Board of Revenue; whether the grant to the petitioner was governed by the 1971, 1972 or any other lease scheme; whether the original lease of the petitioner was obtained illegally; whether, he could not be granted proprietary rights in the land in dispute because of alienation of his own land in favour of his heirs; and whether, the petitioner failed to satisfy the relevant conditions. These and other related questions as also those raised in this petition require examination. . Leave to appeal, accordingly, is granted. Security Rs. 5,
000. The appeal shall be prepared on the present record with direction to the parties to file all those documents which would be necessary for the disposal of the appeal. Stay to continue subject to the furnishing of security for mesne profits , from the date of the order of the High Court within one month, to the satisfaction of the Collector concerned. H.B.T./S‑486/S Leave granted.