P L D (Rev (PLP)
SULTAN‑Petitioner Versus THE CROWN‑Respondent
| Citation | P L D (Rev (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | |
| Bench Members | Nasir Ahmad, Financial Commissioner |
| Parties | SULTAN‑Petitioner Versus THE CROWN‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Lambardari land grant from Government‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D (Rev (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Lambardari land grant from Government‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D (Rev (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the bench comprising: Nasir Ahmad, Financial Commissioner.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D (Rev (PLP) (SULTAN‑Petitioner Versus THE CROWN‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Zaki‑ud‑Din Pal, for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
Option given by n Government to purchase on concession rate within one year --Option cannot be availed of after one year.
Judgment & Decree
NASIR AHMAD, F. C.‑The simple facts are that the petitioner's father who was a Lambardar held half a square as a Lambardari grant in Chak No. 117 N. B. Government gave an option to hereditary Latnbardars in their letter No. 2586‑C, dated 22nd May, 1951 to purchase their Lambardari grants within one year from the date of issue of this letter at the concession rate of Rs. 150 per acre. The petitioner's father died on 16th June, 1951 and the petitioner was appointed to succeed him as Lambardar on 23rd July, 1952. The concession given by Government could not, therefore, be availed of either by the petitioner or his father. He has attempted to enforce legally what he considers his right to purchase this land on the terms and conditions contained in the Government letter referred to above. This attempt has rightly been rejected by the Collector and the learned Commissioner on the ground that if the option was not exercised, Government is not bound .to continue this concession in favour of the son of the deceased Lambardar. The only thing that can be said is that it was unfortunate that the Lambardar died within the period of one year during which the concession could be availed of. On legal grounds however there is no case and the petition stands rejected. A. H. Petition rejected.