Find a Lawyer

Review No. 68 of 1986, decided on 7th April, 1986.

---S. 8--West Pakistan Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967), S.36-Appointment of Lambardar--Petitioner being whole time employee offered to resign his job if appointed' as Lambardar--On such undertaking petitioner was appointed Lambardar on condition to resign within specified time--Review petition for removal of condition to resign from service- Purpose of appointment of Lambardar is to provide to village community both a spokesman and a person to discharge mandatory functions of office by way of attestation, authentication and verification--Such purpose would not be served if incumbent was employed on whole time basis necessitating his absence during major part of the day--Offer to resign having been made voluntarily, there would be no justification for amending such order--If offer to resign to his job not been made, petitioner would have been found disqualified far appointment as Lambardar.

Rao Hamid Mukhtar Khanh for Petitioner.

This review petitioner is preferred under section 8 of the West Pakistan Board of Revenue Act against the orders passed by this Court on 11-12-1985 in R.O.R. No. 1530 of 1985, whereby the revision against the appointment of the petitioner as Lambardar was rejected in terms of the following observations:

"I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. After considering the arguments addressed by the respective counsel, I would find that the petitioner and the respondent have almost equal merits, except that the respondent is more educated and both his father and grandfather held that posts of temporary Lambardar of this Chak. The respondent Muhammad Abad Ali Khan, however, is a bank employee at Bhakkar which is at a distance of 17 Miles from the Chak. The learned counsel for' the respondent has made an oral statement before the Court that the respondent Muhammad Abad Ali Khan would resign from the post within a period of three months so as to remove the ineligibility on account of his employment outside the Chak. With this statement made by the counsel with the consent of the respondent Muhammad Abad Ali Khan, who is present in the Court, I would order that the respondent would continue as Lambardar subject to his resigning from the employment outside the Chak within a period of three months, failing which he would be removed from the office."

The review petitioner Muhammad Abad Ali Khan challenged the condition laid down by this Court that he would resign from his employment within a period of three months in writ petition before the Lahore High Court which was disposed of by the learned Judge with the following observations:-

"I have considered the submissions of the petitioner and I find that the precedent cited by him is not on all fours with the present case. In this case, the petitioner's counsel made certain commitments before the learned Member, Board of Revenue. In case the petitioner could not bring to the notice of learned member the case, of hardship as is being lime-lighted before this Court, it is open for the petitioner to again approach the learned Member (Revenue), Board of Revenue on compassionate or other pleas and it is for the learned Member to consider the pleas being raised before him.

Speaking for this Court, I am not minded in these circumstances to interfere with the impugned order in exercise of my discretionary jurisdiction. It is disposed of accordingly."

The petitioner now seeks through this review petition that the condition of resignation be deleted.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner in preliminary hearing. The purpose of appointment of a Lambardar is to provide to the village community both a spokesman and a person to discharge the mandatory functions of the office by way of attestation, authentication and verification. Such purpose obviously would not be served if the incumbent is employed on a whole time basis necessitating his absence during the major part of the day. Since it was on this consideration that the orders under review were passed, I would find no justification for amending those orders, particularly when the offer was voluntarily made by the review petitioner. I must also observe that in case such offer were not made, I would have found petitioner as disqualified for appointment as Lambardar. With these observations the review petition is dismissed in limine.

A . A . 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.