P L D 1959 (W (PLP)
SADIQ‑Petitioner Versus GAHREY KHAN‑Respondent
| Citation | P L D 1959 (W (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | |
| Bench Members | M. W. Abbasi, Member Board of Revenue, West Pakistan |
| Parties | SADIQ‑Petitioner Versus GAHREY KHAN‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1959 (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 1959 (W (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the bench comprising: M. W. Abbasi, Member Board of Revenue, West Pakistan.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1959 (W (PLP) (SADIQ‑Petitioner Versus GAHREY KHAN‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Kh. Abdur Rahim for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
Horse‑breeding ‑ Allotment of land‑Recommendation of District Remount Officer‑Not to be ignored unless perverse or manifestly absurd.
Judgment & Decree
Revision Side No. 133 of 1958‑59, decided on 18th April 1959, District Montgomery. Horse‑breeding ‑ Allotment of land‑Recommendation of District Remount Officer‑Not to be ignored unless perverse or manifestly absurd. Kh. Abdur Rahim for Petitioner. This is a revision petition against the order of the Additional Commissioner, Multan, dated 6‑1‑1951, upholding the order of the Collector, Montgomery, by which the allotment of the land in question has been made to the respondent on horse‑breeding conditions. The facts of the case are that this allotment was originally held by one Nur Muhammad on horse‑breeding con ditions. He became an absentee and the allotment was resumed. Fresh applications were invited and the District Remount Officer recommended Gahrey Khan respondent as his first nominee. He did not at all recommend petitioner Sadiq. In appeal the Additional Commissioner rejected his case mainly on the ground that he was not resident in the chak. The learned counsel for the petitioner has now filed an extract from the jamabandi showing his residence in the village. The petitioner is also said to have experience of mare‑breeding although there is no evidence to this effect. Even granting for the sake of argument that he is also a resident of the chak along with the respondent, the fact remains that the District Remount Officer did not find him suitable for a horse‑breeding grant. It has been consistently held by the Board of Revenue that the recommendation of the District A Remount Officer on the suitability of a candidate for a horse breeding grant must be given due weight and should not be ignored unless it is perverse or manifestly absurd. In this case I do not find anything wrong with the recommendation of the District Remount Officer and its acceptance by the Courts below. On the other hand, Gahrey Khan also fulfils one of the important conditions an is that he is a resident of the chak. I, therefore, see no ground to interfere and the revision petition is dismissed. K. M. A. Revision dismissed.