Find a Lawyer

‑‑‑Art. 199‑‑Punjab Tenancy Act (XVI of 1887), Ss. 77 & 80‑‑Duty of statutory functionary‑‑Where statutory functionary has acted in perfunctory manner or carelessly and without taking interest or pain in matter in dispute, order passed by him, held, would stand vitiated‑ Law enjoins upon all statutory functionaries to act justly, honestly and to render just decision after making inquiry and recording reasons‑ Conclusion of Assistant Collector being quite opposite to that of Collector in respect of same entry in Jamabandi, admittedly arrived at by two officers without bothering to hold any enquiry or making any effort to ascertain facts being conjectural and fanciful‑‑Conclusions of two officers not based on reality would not be sustainable and were set aside by High Court in constitutional jurisdiction.

‑‑‑Art. 199‑‑Punjab Tenancy Act (XVI of 1887), Ss.77 & 80‑‑Order passed by Collector appearing to be more conjectural and fanciful than based on reality and having been passed without holding due inquiry into factual aspects of case, was declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect by High Court in exercise of constitutional jurisdiction.

Muhammad Aslam Nagi for Petitioner.

Nemo for Respondents.

Date of hearing: 7th June, 1986.

This writ petition is directed against the order of a Collector who reversed the order of an Assistant Collector 1st Grade regarding the eviction of the respondent‑tenant from agricultural land.

2. The short grievance being made by the petitioner is that the Assistant Collector 1st Grade had held that he had the jurisdiction in the matter because the respondent was recorded as tenant‑at‑will as per Jamabandi of the relevant year. The copy of the Jamabandi is Annexure 'A' to this writ petition. This order of the Assistant Collector 1st Grade was set aside in appeal by the Collector, Lahore City on the reasoning that if the respondent was tenant‑at‑will then he would have been recorded as giving the Batai and not fixed sum.

3. I need not go into unnecessary details. Suffice it to say that whenever a question rises for determination before a Court as a result of a lis inter partes the same has to be decided after due inquiry and objective ascertainment of facts so that justice can be done between the parties. It is unfortunate that dealing with the same entry in the Jamabandi the Assistant Collector 1st Grade came to one conclusion while the Collector came to an opposite conclusion. However, one thing is patent on the face of the record that neither of the two officers bothered to hold any inquiry or made any effort to ascertain the facts or made any further inquiry to find out as to whose contention had a grain of truth and who was telling a lie in the face of the Court. The orders appear to be more conjectural and fanciful than based on reality. When a statutory functionary has acted in a perfunctory manner its order would stand vitiated because the law enjoins upon all the statutory functionaries to act justly and honestly and to render a just decision after making inquiry and recording reasons.

4. There is none present on behalf of respondent No.l. He is, therefore, recorded ex parte.

5. In view of what has been stated above, the impugned order of the Collector is declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect and the case is remanded to him for a fresh decision in accordance with law and after making due inquiry into the factual aspects. It will be open for the parties to raise whatever objections they wish on the question of jurisdiction or otherwise before the appellate forum. The Collector will dispose of the matter in remand within two months. There will be in the circumstances no order as to costs.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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