AP L D (Rev (PLP)

SAIDULLAH KHAN, F. C.‑This is an application for revision against the order of the Commissioner Lahore Division, dated the 8th August 1951, by which he dismissed the appeal of Muhammad Tufail petitioner and upheld the order of the Collector, Sialkot, dated the 27th January 1951, appointing Ch. Zafar Ahmed respondent as lambardar of village Mahal Jam, Tahsil Pasrur in the Sialkot District, in place of his deceased grandfather Ch. Ghulam Mustafa. The relationship of the parties is apparent from the pedigree table given below:- Ghulam Mustafa ______________________________|____________________________ | | Muhammad Nawaz Muhammad Tufail ____|_______________ _________________|_______ | | | | Zafar Ahmad Nazar Bashir Mazhar Ahmad Ahmad Ahmad It would appear from the above pedigree‑table that Ch. Ghulam Mustafa lambardar of village Mahal Jam died in May 1950, leaving behind Muhammad Tufail, petitioner his son and Zafar Ahmad, Nazar Ahmad, Bashir Ahmad, Mazhar Ahmad and Ijaz Ahmad, sons of his elder predeceased son, Muhammad Nawaz Khan. The vacancy thus caused by the demise of Ghulam Mustafa Lambardar, was contested by Muhammad Tufail (son of the deceased) and War Ahmad, respondent son of the predeceased son of Ghulam Mustafa. The sole contention of the petitioner before the learned Collector in this case was that as Zafar Ahmad, respondent was not entitled to succeed to the estate left by the deceased Ghulam Mustafa under the Shariat Act he could not claim succession to the post of lambardari under the Rule of Primogeniture. This contention of the petitioner did not find favour with the Collector who held that the Shariat Act did not override the provisions of the Land Revenue Rules and there was thus no bar to the appointment of Zafar Ahmad as lambardar in place of his grandfather under the Rule of Primogeniture. Finding himself in agreement with the views of the learned Collector the Commissioner rejected the appeal preferred by the petitioner hence this revision petition. The parties with their counsel present and heard. The learned counsel for the petitioner laid stress on the point of the eligibility of the heir according to the Rule of Primo geniture and pointed out that as according to the Shariat Act a grandson whose father has died during the lifetime of his grand father is not entitled to a share left in the estate by his grandfather he is also not entitled to succeed to the post of lambardari falling vacant on the death of the grandfather. The view set forth by the learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be accepted in so far that the succession to the estate has apparently nothing to do with the appointment of a lambardar and the learned Collector, to my mind, has not in any way erred 1n appointing Zaffar Ahmad, respondent, as lambardar in place of the deceased Ghulam Mustafa. It may be pointed out in this connection that the provisions of the Shariat Act A do not in any way override the provisions of the Land Revenue Rule 17 as the former governs succession to an estate while the latter refers to the appointments of the village officials. In view of these observations I see no valid reason to interfere with the order and accordingly reject this revision petition. Rejected. A. H. Petition rejected.