Find a Lawyer

Civil Petition No. 842 of 1976, decided on 29th May, 1984.

(On appeal from the judgment dated 2‑6‑1976 of the Lahore High Court in R . S . A . 33 of 1977) .

‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑West Pakistan General Clauses Act (VI of 1956), S.2(17)‑‑"Commissioner"‑‑Definition‑‑View of High Court that certificate issued by "Additional Commissioner" to effect that sale of property in dispute was exempt from operation of law of pre‑emption would be deemed to be certificate issued by "Commissioner" found to be correct‑ Leave to appeal refused.

Raja Muhammad Muzaffar, Advocate Supreme Court and' S.Wajid Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.

Nemo for Respondents.

Date of hearing: 23rd May, 1984.

‑‑The question as to whether the certificate issued by the "Additional" Commissioner to the effect that the sale of the property in dispute exempt from the operation of the law of pre‑emption, could be deemed to be certificate issued by the Commissioner.

2. It has been held by the High Court that the definition of Commissioner given in section 2(17) of the General Clauses Act, 1956 includes the Additional Commissioner and, therefore, the latter had the authority to issue the requisite certificate.

3.A perusal of the definition of 'Commissioner' in subsection (17) of section 2, which is to the effect:‑

"(17) Commissioner shall mean the Chief Officer of the Revenue and General Administrator of a Division and shall include an

Additional Commissioner such division."

clearly shows that the view taken by the High Court that the Additional Commissioner (Revenue), who issued the requisite certificate in such case, would be deemed to be the Commissioner in the relevant regard, is quite correct.

This petition therefore, fails and is dismissed hereby.

S. Q. Petition dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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