1987 PLP 730 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD ISMAIL and others‑‑Petitioners Versus CHAIRMAN, BORDER ALLOTMENT COMMITTEE and others‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1987 PLP 730 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Allan Burhanuddin Khan and Saad Saood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ISMAIL and others‑‑Petitioners Versus CHAIRMAN, BORDER ALLOTMENT COMMITTEE and others‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1987 PLP 730 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1987 PLP 730 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Allan Burhanuddin Khan and Saad Saood Jan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1987 PLP 730 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD ISMAIL and others‑‑Petitioners Versus CHAIRMAN, BORDER ALLOTMENT COMMITTEE and others‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- M. Talib Hussain Awan, Advocate Supreme Court with Sh. Salahuddin, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
- Mian M. Saleem, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Muhammad Aslam, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent No. 3.
- Date of hearing: 4th February, 1987.
- MIAN BURHANUDDIN KHAN, J.‑‑ According to the petitioners land measuring 18 Kanals and 3 Marlas situate in Mauza Kasur Khas, Tehsil and District Kasur was in cultivating possession of the petitioners for more than 60 years; the Government of West Pakistan (Colonies Department) vide Letter No.3712‑64/2189‑CVI dated 31‑7‑1964 decided to give proprietary rights to the tenants of the State Land who were in continuous possession of the land allotted to them; the petitioners applied, under this Notification for the purchase of the land in their possession; the Collector vide his order dated 30‑11‑1970 granted proprietary rights to the petitioners and allowed the sale in their favour. It is stated that the petitioners started paying the price of the land and deposited the entire price between 21‑2‑1971 to 1‑6‑1979. However, the Border Allotment Committee, vide order dated 27‑7‑1978 allotted some land including that of the petitioners to respondent No.3 Lt.‑Col. Jamshed Ahmad Khan. The petitioners objected to the allotment of their land by an application to the Border Area Allotment Committee but the same was dismissed vide order dated 19‑7‑1980. The petitioners then filed a writ petition in the Lahore High Court which was withdrawn by them subsequently allegedly on the assurance of the Assistant Advocate -General representing the State that the eligible tenants would be given alternate land, but this never materialized and the petitioners filed another writ petition against the order of the Border Area Allotment Committee dated 27‑7‑1978 and 19‑7‑1980 which was dismissed in limine by the learned High Court Judges vide the impugned order dated 17‑11‑1986.
- "The learned Advocate‑General on the basis of instruction: imparted to him by Secretary (Colonies), Board of Revenue, under his Letter No. 2037‑8602149‑TH‑IV dated 13‑11‑1986 inform. the Bench that the petitioners did not contact the Board of Revenue and that in case they apply, their application for allotment of alternate land shall be considered on merits, in accordance with law."
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, dated 17‑11‑1986 passed in Writ Petition No. 324/R of 1985). ‑‑‑Arts. 185(3) b 199‑‑Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act (V of 1912), S.30‑‑Proprietary rights‑‑Acquisition of‑‑Tenants in possession‑‑Transfer of proprietary rights‑‑Petitioner‑tenants allowed to purchase State land‑‑Before transfer of proprietary rights land allotted to some other person‑‑Petitioners' application objecting to fresh allotment failed‑‑Writ petition filed by petitioners was withdrawn on assurance that they would be given alternate land‑‑Assurance not being fulfilled they filed second writ petition which was dismissed as not maintainable‑ Petition for leave to appeal‑‑Plea raised that petitioners were condemned unheard when land in their possession was allotted to other person‑‑High Court having considered this question found that petitioners had not contacted Board of Revenue and that in case they applied in such behalf their application for allotment of alternate land shall be considered on merits in accordance with law‑‑Impugned finding not being open to interference, leave to appeal refused.
Judgment & Decree
M. Talib Hussain Awan, Advocate Supreme Court with Sh. Salahuddin, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners. Mian M. Saleem, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Muhammad Aslam, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent No.
3. Date of hearing: 4th February, 1987. MIAN BURHANUDDIN KHAN, J.‑‑ According to the petitioners land measuring 18 Kanals and 3 Marlas situate in Mauza Kasur Khas, Tehsil and District Kasur was in cultivating possession of the petitioners for more than 60 years; the Government of West Pakistan (Colonies Department) vide Letter No.3712‑64/2189‑CVI dated 31‑7‑1964 decided to give proprietary rights to the tenants of the State Land who were in continuous possession of the land allotted to them; the petitioners applied, under this Notification for the purchase of the land in their possession; the Collector vide his order dated 30‑11‑1970 granted proprietary rights to the petitioners and allowed the sale in their favour. It is stated that the petitioners started paying the price of the land and deposited the entire price between 21‑2‑1971 to 1‑6‑1979. However, the Border Allotment Committee, vide order dated 27‑7‑1978 allotted some land including that of the petitioners to respondent No.3 Lt.‑Col. Jamshed Ahmad Khan. The petitioners objected to the allotment of their land by an application to the Border Area Allotment Committee but the same was dismissed vide order dated 19‑7‑1980. The petitioners then filed a writ petition in the Lahore High Court which was withdrawn by them subsequently allegedly on the assurance of the Assistant Advocate -General representing the State that the eligible tenants would be given alternate land, but this never materialized and the petitioners filed another writ petition against the order of the Border Area Allotment Committee dated 27‑7‑1978 and 19‑7‑1980 which was dismissed in limine by the learned High Court Judges vide the impugned order dated 17‑11‑1986.
2. Now leave is sought by the petitioners to appeal against the impugned order on the grounds that they were condemned unheard when the land in their possession was allotted to respondent No.3 vide order dated 27‑7‑1978 which order is void and of no legal effect as the petitioners had already paid 16 instalments and only two instalments remained to be paid; that the principle that no person should be condemned unheard was not taken into consideration by the learned High Court Judges; and that the learned High Court dismissed the petition on the ground that the earlier Writ Petition No. 616/R of 1980 was withdrawn by the petitioners on 28‑1‑1985, and therefore, subsequent petition was not maintainable. 3.We have examined the grievance of the petitioners and see that the learned High Court Judges have considered this question and gave a finding, in the impugned judgment, as under: "The learned Advocate‑General on the basis of instruction: imparted to him by Secretary (Colonies), Board of Revenue, under his Letter No. 2037‑8602149‑TH‑IV dated 13‑11‑1986 inform. the Bench that the petitioners did not contact the Board of Revenue and that in case they apply, their application for allotment of alternate land shall be considered on merits, in accordance with law." In the light of the foregoing we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order. Petition merits no consideration. Leave refused. Petition dismissed. M.I. /M‑37/S Petition dismissed.