1991 PLP 1506 (MLD)

Writ Petition No.192 of 1991, heard on 10th April, 1991.

S. 164

Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199

Constitutional jurisdiction, exercise of

Revision filed by petitioners against decision of Commissioner, neither was decided by Board of Revenue in accordance with law nor on its merits and order passed in revision also was a non-speaking order

Such order being a nullity in law was declared illegal by High Court in exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction and the case was remanded to be decided afresh in accordance with law. Ch. Muhammad Rafique Khan for Petitioners. Faiz Muhammad Sadiq and Farooq Bedar, Addl. A.-G. for Respondents. Date of hearing: 10th April, 1991. On 4-3-1985, learned A.C. Jaranwala declared Squares Nos. 53 and 59 as Charagah because said land was situated in the neighbourhood of Abadi-deh While Square No.54 was declared as `Baqaya Sarkar'. This order was challenged by means of an appeal which was heard and accepted by the learned Commissioner on 10-10-1988. It was specifically observed by the learned Commissioner that the land in question was situated within the prohibited zone and as such ownership rights cannot be given to either party. A revision petition was instituted by the present petitioners which was heard and dismissed by the learned Member (Judicial), Board of Revenue on 8-10-1990. Learned counsel contends that the learned Member, Board of Revenue noted the contentions of the learned counsel for the parties and did not himself decide the same according to law. Mr. Farooq Bedar, learned Law Officer and Mr. Faiz Muhammad Sadiq learned counsel for contesting respondent agree that revision petition of the petitioners has not been decided as yet by the learned Member on its merits according to law. Both the learned counsel agree that it was the statutory duty of the learned Member, Board of Revenue to have decided the revision of the petitioners on its merits. I am of the view that the impugned order dated 8-10-1990 is not a speaking order inasmuch as nothing has been said on the merits of the case by the learned Member. This being so the impugned order dated 8-10-1990 is a nullity in law. In consequence, it is declared to be without A lawful authority and of no legal consequence. The revision petition of the petitioners may be deemed to be pending decision before the learned Member who shall decide it as early as possible according to law. It has been brought to my notice that against the same impugned order four other revision petitions are pending adjudication before Syed Asad Ali Shah learned Member, Board of Revenue. Learned counsel request that revision of the petitioners may also be heard alongwith the said connected matters. It is observed that the revision of the petitioners shall also be heard by Syed Asad Ali Shah, learned Member, Board of Revenue alongwith similar matters. The parties shall appear before the learned Member on 30-5-1'

991. The petition accordingly succeeds and is allowed with no order as to costs. H.B.T./B-252/L Petition allowed.