Find a Lawyer

Revision No. 68 of 1958‑59, decided on 13th January 1960, District Rawalpindi.

, West Pakistan Board of Revenue (Conduct of Appeals and Revisions) Rules, 1959‑Revision petition to Full Board lies only where Single Member of Board has "reversed or modified" decree or order of lower Revenue Court or Revenue Officer.

‑These petitions may be taken up together as the point involved is the same.

They are against the orders of a Single Member passed in appeal. Rule 5 (1) of the West Pakistan Board of Revenue (Conduct of Appeals and Revisions) Rules, 19.59, lays down that "an application for revision under subsection (2) of section 7 of the West Pakistan Boards of Revenue Act, 1957, shall lie to the Full Board only In cases where the order made or decree passed by the Court, subordinate to the Board, is reversed or modified by a Member of the Board on appeal." In these cases the appeals were dismissed and, therefore, no revision lies to the Full Board. The same view was held in unreported case R. O. R. No. 35 of 1958‑59.

It was urged that rule 5 of the West Pakistan Board of Revenue (Conduct of Appeals and Revisions) Rules, 1959, refers only to Revenue Courts and not to Revenue Officers. Whatever may be said for the inclusion of "Revenue Officer" in this rule that does not help the petitioners in any way, because even if "Revenue Officer" is added to this rule, no revision would lie to the Full Board, because the appeals have been dismissed. It cannot be reasonably argued that, whereas no revision should lie to the Full Board in cases where an appeal from an order of a Revenue Court is dismissed, it should lie where such an appeal from an order of a Revenue Officer meets with the same fate.

The result is that all these petitions are rejected in limine.

A. H.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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