1989 PLP 1122 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD ASLAM BAIG‑‑Petitioner Versus MEMBER (COLONIES), BOARD OF REVENUE, PUNJAB and others Respondents
| Citation | 1989 PLP 1122 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Javid Iqbal, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ASLAM BAIG‑‑Petitioner Versus MEMBER (COLONIES), BOARD OF REVENUE, PUNJAB and others Respondents |
| Primary Law | Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act (V of 1912) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 1122 (SCMR)?
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 1989 PLP 1122 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Javid Iqbal, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 1122 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD ASLAM BAIG‑‑Petitioner Versus MEMBER (COLONIES), BOARD OF REVENUE, PUNJAB and others Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Zafar Pasha Chaudhry, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Rana Maqbul Ahmad Qadri, Advocatc‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 10th August, 1988.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 19th February, 1983 m W.P. No.8376/1980). ‑‑‑S.10‑‑Horse‑Breeding Grant‑‑State land‑‑Resumption‑‑Grants of the nature of horse‑breeding grant, generally speaking, are discretionary is character anti no vested right is created in them.
Judgment & Decree
JAVID IQBAL, J.‑‑This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the order, dated 19th February 1983 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore whereby the writ petition of the petitioner was dismissed. The facts are that the petitioner had been granted horse‑breeding grant but on the report of the District Remount Officer Sahiwal respecting the breach of terms and conditions of the tenancy, the Collector resumed the tenancy. The order of the Collector was upheld in appeal by the Commissioner and subsequently in revision by the Member, Board of Revenue. The petitioner had challenged the aforesaid orders by way of writ petition which was likewise dismissed by learned Judge of the Lahore High Court, Lahore. Hence the present petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner attempted to argue before us that previously on an adverse report of this nature from the District Remount Officer. the Collector had allowed the petitioner to retain the grant. We have heard learned counsel at some length but generally speaking grants of this nature are discretionary in character and no vested right is created in them. In that view of the matter we do not find any substance in this petition which is accordingly dismissed. M.BA./M‑814/S Petition dismissed.