2001 PLP 1673 (CLC)
ABDUL SALAM through Legal Heirs and 3 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MUZAFFARGARH and. 4 others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 2001 PLP 1673 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Dr. Munir Ahmad Mughal, J |
| Parties | ABDUL SALAM through Legal Heirs and 3 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MUZAFFARGARH and. 4 others‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | West Pakistan Consolidation of Holdings Ordinance (VI of 1960)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2001 PLP 1673 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: West Pakistan Consolidation of Holdings Ordinance (VI of 1960)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2001 PLP 1673 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Dr. Munir Ahmad Mughal, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2001 PLP 1673 (CLC) (ABDUL SALAM through Legal Heirs and 3 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MUZAFFARGARH and. 4 others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mian Fazal Rauf Joya for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondents Nos.1, 2 and 3.
- Date of hearing: 10th April, 2001.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑Ss. 10 & 13‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199‑‑‑Constitutional petition‑‑‑Consolidation Scheme‑‑‑Failure to give notice to the landowners‑‑ Land of the petitioners was not entered in Register Haqdaran Zamin after the approval of the scheme‑‑‑Revenue Authorities refused to make the correction of the Revenue Record‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Valuable rights had accrued to the petitioners which could not be undone without notice to them which was against the principle of natural justice‑‑‑High Court directed the Authorities to decide the matter after hearing the parties‑‑‑Constitutional petition was allowed accordingly. Respondent No.4 in person.
Judgment & Decree
4. Today, nobody has appeared on behalf of the respondents Nos.1, 2 and
3. They are proceeded ex parte. Respondent No.4 is present but no comments have been filed.
5. Arguments heard.
6. Admittedly the petitioners were refugees came in Pakistan in 1947 and they were allotted under the Rehabilitation Scheme of 1965, The areas are as under:‑‑ K‑M confirmed on (1) Wanda 63 Abdul Salam son of 292‑0 22‑4‑1965 Ilyas Khan (2) Wanda 64 Chaghu Khan son of 397‑0 " Ghulam Mohyuddin Khan (3) Wanda 65 Nizam son of Sadullah 322‑0 " (4) Wanda 66 Fateh Khan son of Geeway Khan 282‑0 " Total 1792‑0 Regular Khatooni of that fact is mentioned in R.L.11 which is Annexures "A" and A/1 and Regular Khatooni were issued and possession was given to the petitioners in the year 1980 without notice to the petitioner and the consolidation proceedings were conducted in Deh Tibbi Sultan Mehmood and the area of the petitioners was transferred to other persons who also took possession of the same. The petitioners came to know of this Change and found that the Revenue Staff of Consolidation did not enter the area of the petitioners in the Register Haqdaran and transferred it to she Central Government and even Register Jamabandi of Tibbi Sultan MehMood for the year 1950‑51 was not prepared. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that it is clear violation of the Consolidation of Holdirta Ordinance as the first execution of R. L. II was to be made strictly in the light of R.L.11. The petitioners moved to the A.D.C.(C) for rectifying the arrears on which report was called for and the negligence of the Consolidation Stair was found but the petitioners were refused to remedy their grievance and Were advised to seek redressal of the grievance from the competent Court. The matter is not so simple as the valuable right has accrued to the petitioners which could not be undone without notice to them and it is against the principle of natural justice.
5. Resultantly, the writ petition is accepted and the District Collector, Muzaffargarh is directed to call for all the parties, hear them and decide the application of the petitioners regarding arrears committed concerning the land in question. Q.M.H./M.A.K./A‑221/L Petition allowed.