Find a Lawyer

DISTRICT OFFICER REVENUE, KASUR versus ABDUL REHMAT SHAUKAT

Article 4 (185) appeals for the leave of the applicants without having to follow a valid procedure which was not only illegal but also extremely immoral and condemnable because the province / state and its Was supposed to protect the lives, liberty and safety of its workers by asking the defendant to question the legal status of occupying his property instead of forcibly using the property for the benefit of a power person. The constitutional application was granted by the High Court on the then Advocate General's statement, with the direction of the provincial government of agriculture. The land was upheld by the Supreme Court to reverse the judgment of the High Court, while the provincial government's request was dismissed, while the petitioner (District Officer Revenue) and other officials of the province dragged their feet for about five to five years. Do not follow the directions of the Supreme Court and the respondent was compelled to submit contempt of court petition in H. Instead of punishing the officials, the High Court once again directed such officers Apply the instruction within one month of the decision, again the applicant directs Compliance and may not be offered instead. Appeal for leave to appeal The Supreme Court took notice of non-compliance and, feeling the mood of the Supreme Court, the Chief Secretary of the province appeared and said that by changing the compact piece of agricultural land to the respondents. Has been handed over Until the post of Chief Secretary, the land was transformed in favor of the respondents and by its occupation not only the district law firms from Jhal Magsi lawyer