MLD 1985

1985 P L D 360(1) (PLP)

MANGA KHAN and others — Petitioners Versus SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER and others — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Writ Petition No. 590/11 of 1979, heard on 30th January, 1985.
Honorable Judges
Abdul Shakurul Salam, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1985 P L D 360(1) (PLP)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Abdul Shakurul Salam, J
Parties MANGA KHAN and others — Petitioners Versus SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER and others — Respondents
Primary Law Constitution of Pakistan (1973)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1985 P L D 360(1) (PLP)?

This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1985 P L D 360(1) (PLP)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Abdul Shakurul Salam, J.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1985 P L D 360(1) (PLP) (MANGA KHAN and others — Petitioners Versus SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Constitution of Pakistan (1973)

Representation

  • A Sardar Abdul Latif and Ch. Abdus Sattar for Petitioners.
  • Muhammad Nazir Ahmad for Respondents. Nos. 1 and 2.
  • Date of hearing: 30th January, 1985.

Headnotes / Summary

Art. 199--Practice and procedure--Matter in writ petition was referred to Tribunal for fresh decision in accordance with law, after. notice to all parties concerned--Writ petition allowed in circumstances. Ch. Muhammad Arif for newly added respondent.

Judgment & Decree

For reasons given in the order of even date in Writ Petition No. 559-R of 1979, this petition is allowed and the matter is referred to the learned Member, Board of Revenue, for fresh decision in accordance with law, after notice to all the parties concerned. In the circumstances, the parties shall bear their own costs.

2. In view of the decision in Writ Petition No. 559-R of 1979, the learned counsel for the petitioners does not press C.M. No. 2 of 1979. It is disposed of accordingly. A.A. Petition allowed.