Find a Lawyer

Revision Petition No. 78 of 1954‑55, decided on 5th De cember 1955, from the order of Commissioner, Multan, dated 21st June 1955.

S. 28 and Land Revenue Rule 15‑Lambardari falling vacant on migration of Non‑Muslim to India‑Hereditary claim does not constitute sole criterion for appointment of Lambardar.

-----

---‑Decision of Collector not to be reversed unless it is unreasonable and perverse.

Kh. Abdur Rahim for Petitioner.

Hassan Akhtar for Respondent.

‑This revision petition relates to the Lambardari of Chak No. 203/E B. Tahsil Pakpattan. District Montgomery, which fell vacant as a result of the migration of non‑Muslims to India. The Collector appointed the appellant, Ali Akbar and in doing so he .was mainly influenced by the fact that larger number of refugees belonging to his community were settled in the Chak, also he had more area and influence.

The Commissioner on appeal by the respondent Ghulam Muhammad upset the decision of the Collector on the ground that the respondent was a previous Lambardar. The Commis sioner thus seems to have considered the appointment as more or less hereditary in character. This is not the correct view, because as already held in Sadiq Muhammad Khan v. Aftab Ali (P L D 1955 (Rev.) Pb. 6), these are new appointments made under Land Reve nue Rule 15 and hereditary claims form one of the grounds for consideration and do not constitute the sole criterion. Further it has been held in numerous rulings by Financial Commis sioners following Mashir Ali v. Malik Chiragh Khan (1918 P C L (Rev.) Pb. 9) that unless the Collector has made a perverse or unreasonable decision in a Lambardari case it should not be reversed. On merits I am inclined to agree with the Collector. I would, therefore, accept the revision of Ali Akbar and appoint him Lambardar.

K. M. A. Revision accepted.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.