2006 PLP 951 (SCMR)
MANZOOR HUSSAIN and others — Petitioners Versus MEMBER (JUDICIAL-II), BOARD OF REVENUE and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2006 PLP 951 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday and Falak Sher, JJ |
| Parties | MANZOOR HUSSAIN and others — Petitioners Versus MEMBER (JUDICIAL-II), BOARD OF REVENUE and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | (b) West Pakistan Consolidation of Holdings Ordinance (VI of 1960), (a) West Pakistan Consolidation of Holdings Ordinance (VI of 1960) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 951 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: (b) West Pakistan Consolidation of Holdings Ordinance (VI of 1960), (a) West Pakistan Consolidation of Holdings Ordinance (VI of 1960) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2006 PLP 951 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday and Falak Sher, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 951 (SCMR) (MANZOOR HUSSAIN and others — Petitioners Versus MEMBER (JUDICIAL-II), BOARD OF REVENUE and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- M. Aftab Iqbal Chaudhree, Advocate Supreme Court with M. Aslam Chaudhry, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 30th December, 2004.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 5-9-2000 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, passed in Writ Petition No.17747 of 2000).
S. 10
Deficiency in petitioner's land was only of eight Marlas
Examination of such question at various stages including Board of Revenue
Consolidation of holdings and consequent distribution of Wandas being a question of fact, could not be gone into by High Court in exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction
Such question would be examined and decided by Consolidation Authorities under West Pakistan Consolidation of Holdings Ordinance, 1960
Deficiency of land upto ten Marlas was permissible
Supreme Court dismissed petition and refused leave to appeal.
S. 10
Consolidation of holdings and consequent distribution of Wandas
Deficiency of land upto ten Marlas would be permissible.
Judgment & Decree
KHALIL-UR-REHMAN RAMDAY, J.
Consolidation of holdings and consequent distribution of Wandas is essentially a question to be examined, and decided by the Consolidation Authorities under Consolidation of Holdings Ordinance, 1960. The matter was examined at various stages including the Board of Revenue which had occasioned to scrutinize the issue twice i.e. firstly in its revisional jurisdiction and secondly, on a review filed by the present petitioners. The petitioners then approached the Honourable High Court invoking its Constitutional jurisdiction and their petition failed as it was found by the learned Judge in Chamber that the question being essentially one of the fact could not be gone into by the High Court in exercise of its extraordinary Constitutional jurisdiction. It was also mentioned by the learned Single Judge that the deficiency of land upto ten Marlas is permissible and in the petitioners' case the deficiency was only eight Marlas.
2. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners at some length and having perused the material available on record, we find that the impugned order dated 5-9-2000 of the Honourable High Court passed in Writ Petition No.17747 of 2000 is not open any exception. This petition is, therefore, dismissed. Leave refused. S.A.K./M-249/SC?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Leave refused.