P L D 1959 W (PLP)
MUHAMMAD SADIQ‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
| Citation | P L D 1959 W (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | |
| Bench Members | A. K. Malik, Member, Board of Revenue West Pakistan |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD SADIQ‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Lambardari square‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1959 W (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Lambardari square‑ 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: A. K. Malik, 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) (MUHAMMAD SADIQ‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Hassan Akhtar for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
Judgment & Decree
Hassan Akhtar for Petitioner. This is a revision petition against an order of the Commis sioner, Multan Division, dated 7th July 1956, by which he upheld the order of the Colony Assistant, Lyallpur dated 24th March 1956, who rejected the application of the petitioner to purchase proprietary rights of the Lamdardari square situated in Chak No. 61/GB, of the Jaranwala Tahsil, Lyallpur District. The petitioner is a Lambardar of this Chak sad holds a Lambardari square. In pursuance of the former Punjab Government letter No. 2286‑C, dated 2nd May 1951, proprietary rights in the Lambardari square could be purchased within one year from the date of the issue of that letter. The petitioner however, applied to acquire these rights only on 14‑3‑55, long after the due date had expired. The Collector, therefore, rejected his application and an appeal against that order before the Commissioner, Multan Division, was also dismissed. I have heard the petitioner with Raja Hassan Akhtar, Advocate. It has been pleaded before me that they petitioner remained ill for a long time and although he had put in his application for the acquisition of his proprietary rights in time, he could not pursue it due to illness. As the learned Commis sioner has observed no proof is forthcoming that such an application was actually filed before the proper authorities. The Government have recently by their memorandum No. COL -10/12‑56 dated the 8th August 1956, from the Secretary to the Government of West Pakistan Revenue Department to the Deputy Secretary, Board of Revenue, West Pakistan, issued A further instructions allowing hereditary Lambardars to purchase proprietary rights in their Lambardari grants within a period of one year from 8th August 1956 of payment of Rs. 800 per acre. It is open to the petitioner to avail of this concession. I see no grounds for interference with the orders passed by the Collector and the Commissioner and dismiss the petition. K. M. A. Petition dismissed.