1986 PLP 1947 (MLD)
LAL DIN and 13 others‑‑Petitioners Versus THE SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB, COLONIES DEPARTMENT and another‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1986 PLP 1947 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Fazl‑i‑Mahmood, J |
| Parties | LAL DIN and 13 others‑‑Petitioners Versus THE SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB, COLONIES DEPARTMENT and another‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act (V of 1912)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 PLP 1947 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act (V of 1912)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1986 PLP 1947 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Fazl‑i‑Mahmood, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1986 PLP 1947 (MLD) (LAL DIN and 13 others‑‑Petitioners Versus THE SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB, COLONIES DEPARTMENT and another‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Rashid Chughtai for Petitioners.
- Khalil Ramday, Addl. A.‑G. for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S.30‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199‑‑Proprietary rights, claim for‑‑Rejection of‑‑Rescission of circular memorandum‑‑Effect Where proprietary rights claimed on basis of earlier circular memorandum of Board of Revenue were rejected on basis of subsequent circular memorandum which later on was rescinded, findings based on such non‑existent circular memorandum, held, would automatically vanish High Court setting aside rejection orders of functionaries and remanded case for fresh disposal in accordance with law. Dated of hearing: 26th February, 1986.
Judgment & Decree
Muhammad Rashid Chughtai for Petitioners. Khalil Ramday, Addl. A.‑G. for Respondents. Dated of hearing: 26th February, 1986. This writ petition is based on the grievance that the petitioners had applied for proprietary rights on the basis of circular memorandum of 1979, but the functionaries below had taken into account the subsequent circular memorandum of the Board of Revenue, dated 31‑1‑1983 and thus rejected the entitlement of the petitioners.
2. The learned Additional Advocate‑General Mr. Khalil Ramday has produced before me the circular memorandum of the Board of Revenue, dated 20‑2‑1986 whereby earlier memorandum, dated 31‑1‑1983 has been rescinded: It follows as a natural corollary that the orders based upon non‑existent circular automatically vanished. I have, therefore, no hesitation in setting aside the impugned orders. The case is accordingly remanded to the Collector concerned for fresh disposal of the petitioners application for conferment of proprietary rights in accordance with law. No order as to costs. H.B.T. Petition allowed/order accordingly.