Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Revision Side No. 229 of 1956‑57, decided on 21st June 1957, District Lyallpur.
S. 16--‑Revision petition presented to Rehabilitation Commissioner instead of to the Board of Revenue‑--No satisfactory explanation submitted‑--Delay held to be against petitioner.
S. 24‑Allotment of land merely for occupation from year to year without there being any detailed conditions‑---Land may be resumed by Collector without notice.
Muhammad Iqbal Hussain for Petitioner.
There is no satisfactory explanation why this petition of revi sion was initially presented before the Rehabilitation Commissioner. The delay is, therefore, a matter which I must hold against the petitioner.
The petitioner's argument is that the state land in dispute was allotted to him in 1947 and could not, therefore, have been taken away from him unless he had first been given a notice under section 24 of the Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act, 1912. This argument cannot be of any avail, because the allot ment in question was not in accordance with any detailed set of B conditions issued under the Act. The allotment was for purposes of occupation of the land from year to year. If the occupation of the petitioner was terminated in 1956 it only means that the Collector refused to give him this land for another year. Such a refusal is perfectly justified even without complying with any formality under the said section 24.
In the above circumstances, I dismiss this petition for revision without issuing notice to the other party.
A. H. Petition dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer