1991 PLP 795 (CLC)
NOOR MUHAMMAD and others ‑‑‑ Petitioners Versus SAIFULLAH and others ‑‑‑ Respondents
| Citation | 1991 PLP 795 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Raja Afrasiab Khan, J |
| Parties | NOOR MUHAMMAD and others ‑‑‑ Petitioners Versus SAIFULLAH and others ‑‑‑ Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1991 PLP 795 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1991 PLP 795 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Raja Afrasiab Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1991 PLP 795 (CLC) (NOOR MUHAMMAD and others ‑‑‑ Petitioners Versus SAIFULLAH and others ‑‑‑ Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Hafiz Muhammad Yousaf for Petitioners.
- Rana Abdul Majeed for Respondent No.l.
- Farooq Bedar, AA.‑G. with A.S. Hashini and Akhtar Shabbir, AA.‑G. for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑ Art. 199 ‑‑‑ Dispute was only with respect to delivery of possession of land in dispute which was to be re‑auctioned ‑‑‑ Petitioners claimed that land was already in their cultivating possession, while department asserted that as per record land was lying vacant ‑‑‑ Fact of re-auction of land having not been disputed by parties, Authority already deputed for disposal of land in question by means of public auction, was directed to deter mine fact of possession of that land ‑‑‑ In case petitioners were found in cultivating possession of land in dispute, their possession would not be disturbed if they would succeed in auction, if on the other hand petitioners were found not in possession, then possession would be given to them if they succeeded in auction.
Judgment & Decree
Writ Petition No. 18 of 1991, decided on 20th February, 1991. ‑‑‑‑ Art. 199 ‑‑‑ Dispute was only with respect to delivery of possession of land in dispute which was to be re‑auctioned ‑‑‑ Petitioners claimed that land was already in their cultivating possession, while department asserted that as per record land was lying vacant ‑‑‑ Fact of re-auction of land having not been disputed by parties, Authority already deputed for disposal of land in question by means of public auction, was directed to deter mine fact of possession of that land ‑‑‑ In case petitioners were found in cultivating possession of land in dispute, their possession would not be disturbed if they would succeed in auction, if on the other hand petitioners were found not in possession, then possession would be given to them if they succeeded in auction. Hafiz Muhammad Yousaf for Petitioners. Rana Abdul Majeed for Respondent No.l. Farooq Bedar, AA.‑G. with A.S. Hashini and Akhtar Shabbir, AA.‑G. for Respondents. It is not necessary to give details of the whole case. It is enough to say that the learned Member (Colonies) Board of Revenue on'6‑12‑1990 directed that the land in question will be re‑auctioned after due publicity in the Chak after Rabi, 1991. The petitioners have questioned the vires of the aforesaid order by means of this Constitutional petition praying that before the land is actually re- auctioned, possession thereof should not be given to the respondents. The case of the petitioners is that the land in question is already in their cultivating possession. Noor Muhammad Lambardar and Akber Ali, petitioners are present in person. They have stated before the Court that they have sown wheat and Shatala crops over the land in question. The revenue official with record is present. He states that as per his record the land is lying vacant. Both the parties do not dispute the fact of re‑auction of the land in question. The 'dispute is only with respect to the delivery of possession. The Deputy Commissioner shall go ahead with the schedule already announced by the learned Member Board of Revenue regarding disposal of the land by means of a public auction. He will also determine the fact of possession of the land in question. If he comes to the conclusion that the petitioners are in the cultivating possession of the land in dispute, and if ultimately, they succeed in the auction their possession shall not be disturbed. However, if he comes to the conclusion that the petitioners are not in possession of the land and that the same is vacant, then of course possess ion thereof shall be given to the petitioners in case they succeed in the auction. With these observations, this petition stands disposed of. H.B.T./N‑426/L Order accordingly.