Find a Lawyer

Civil Petition No. 1043 of 1985, decided on 8^th December, 1985

(On appeal from the judgment and order, dated 16‑11‑1985 passed by' the Lahore High Court in Writ Petition 1462 of 1977.

‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act (V of 1912), S. 10(4)‑‑Lease of State land under Livestock Breeding Scheme‑ Formal deed executed and registered and possession of land handed over to petitioner by Tehsildar‑‑Subsequently, on report of field staff land ordered to be included in schedule of temporary cultivation‑‑Order challenged‑‑Since possession was not officially delivered to Lambardar under S. 10(4) of Act (V of 1912), it was declared illegal and lease cancelled‑‑Order upheld in appeal and revision as also by High Court‑ Leave to appeal‑‑Petitioner not being in lawful possession, lease in his favour could not have taken legal effect‑‑Impugned order being unexceptionable, leave to appeal refused by Supreme Court.

Ch. Shaukat Ali Saqib, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Muhammad Aslam Chaudhry, Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for Petitioner.

Nemo for Respondents.

‑The claim of the petitioner rests on the order, dated 22‑8‑1970 by which the Assistant Commissioner, exercising the powers of Collector, Saddar Sub‑Division, Sargodha, leased out State land measuring 54 Kanals under the Livestock Breeding Scheme and a formal lease deed was executed and registered on 14‑10‑1970.

The petitioner next appeared before the Tehsildar on 28‑10‑1970 who demarcated the land and handed over its possession to him. He thereafter cultivated it, but on a report made to the Collector on 5th of July, 1972 by the 'field staff' that the petitioner had not cultivated the land, it was ordered that it should be included in the schedule of temporary cultivation and that its possession should not be delivered. He did not succeed in appeal as it was dismissed by the Additional Commissioner, Sargodha, on 13‑10‑1972, but on revision a Member, Board of Revenue, remanded the case to the Collector for giving a finding on two questions, namely:

(a) Whether the possession of the land in dispute had actually been given to the petitioner as a result of allotment order, dated 20‑8‑1970

(b) Whether the petitioner was really cultivating it himself

The Collector on remand held that the possession of the land was not "Officially delivered to the Lambardar under section 10(4) of the Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act, 1912", and, accordingly, his possession was declared illegal. As a result of this finding he cancelled the lease taking aid of memorandum No. 337‑74/702‑CV, dated 1st of March, 1974. The appeal against this order was dismissed by the Additional Commissioner (Revenue), Sargodha, dated 12‑9‑1974. A revision against this order was dismissed by the Member (Colonies), Board of Revenue, Punjab by order, dated 18‑6‑1977.

The petitioner being thus aggrieved challenged this order before the High Court in writ jurisdiction, but did not succeed as the High Court upheld the order of the Board of Revenue and further held that as the term of the lease was for ten years which had expired in Rabi 1980, he cannot continue to remain in possession under the shadow of litigation. "

The learned counsel for the petitioner was unable to satisfy us that he was in lawful possession in terms of an order passed under section 10(4) of the Act. That being so the order, dated 22‑8‑1970 could not have taken legal effect. Therefore, his possession was illegal and continued to be so. The orders thus passed by the Board of Revenue and the High Court are unexceptionable.

The petition fails and is hereby dismissed.

M . I . 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.