P L D 1966 W (PLP)
RALANDA AND OTHERS‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | P L D 1966 W (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | |
| Bench Members | I. U. Khan, Chief Land Commissioner, West Pakistan |
| Parties | RALANDA AND OTHERS‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1966 W (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 1966 W (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the bench comprising: I. U. Khan, Chief Land Commissioner, West Pakistan.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1966 W (PLP) (RALANDA AND OTHERS‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Saddique Bhatti for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
West Pakistan Land Reforms Regulation, 1959, para. 19 read with Sales Scheme (Land Reforms) ‑‑ Revised instructions- Brothers of cultivating tenants also entitled to purchase resumed land equal to subsistence holding.
Judgment & Decree
Saddique Bhatti for Petitioners. This is a second revision filed against an order, dated the 5th of April 1963, passed by Land Commissioner, Lahore, whereby the revision preferred by the petitioners was dismissed. The facts of the case are that the three petitioners who are brothers, were in possession of 266 kanals and 18 marlas of land. Under the Sale Scheme, they were given only 20.5 kanals, 3 marlas of land and the balance of the area was taken away from them by the Assistant Land Commissioner. They went in appeal to the Deputy Land Commissioner, but it was dismissed. They then filed a revision, but it was also rejected. Hence this second revision. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and have examined the record. It is established that the petitioners were in cultivating possession of 266 kanals and 18 marlas of land. They were given only 205 kanals and 18 marlas of land and all attempts to get their grievance set right were unsuccessful. The Assistant Land Commissioner, the Deputy Land Commis sioner and the Land Commissioner were influenced by the instructions issued by the Chief Land Commissioner whereby only male lineal descendants were entitled to purchase land under the Sale Scheme. This was not the original intention of the Land Commission and the instructions issued by the Chief Land Commissioner were not, therefore, quite correct. Revised instruc tions have now been issued vide Letter No. D. S. L1‑791‑63/5124 LC., dated the 22nd of October 1963, whereunder brothers are entitled to purchase land under the Sale Scheme. These instructions do not have any retrospective effect, but it has been decided that pending cases shall be disposed of in the light," of new instructions. Under these instructions all the three brothers are entitled to retain an area equal to three times the subsistence holdings or a smaller area in their possession. The revision is accordingly accepted with the direction that Killa Nos. 1 to 7 of Square No. 45 which were withdrawn from the petitioners shall be restored to them. S. Q. Petition accepted.