Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: GHULAM AHMAD VS Respondent: MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE and 2 others
Court Name: Supreme Court of Pakistan Judge(s): Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Saad Saood Jan Title: GHULAM AHMAD vs MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE and 2 others Case No.: Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No,354 of 1985 Date of Judgment:1989-03-21 Reported As: PLD 1989 Supreme Court 344 Result: Leave refused
Judgment ORDER ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--Leave to appeal has been sought, against the dismissal by the High Court, of a Writ Petition whereby a Lambardari case concluded by the Board of Revenue, was sought to be re-opened by the petitioner. ' It was dismissed by making reference to the case-law including Abdul Ghafoor v. The Member (Revenue), Board of Revenue and another 1982 SCM R 202 as also the following three cases:-- (1) Muhammad Warrayam v. Member, Board of Revenue, Punjab, Lahore and 3 others 1972 SCM R 354. (2) Muhammad Shafi v. Member (Revenue), Board of Revenue, Punjab, Lahore and 2 others 1972 SCM R 253. (3) Abdul Wahid v. The Member, Board of Revenue, Punjab, Lahore and another 1971 SCM R 719. ' Learned counsel for the petitioner, to be fair to him, also cited Sharaf Din v. Qazi Abdul Jalil and another 1986 SCM R 1368 wherein the same view with regard to the competency of Writ Petition in Lambardari case was affirmed. The case-law is against the petitioner. ' However, learned counsel while accepting this position again tried to argue that on the one hand there was contravention of statutory rules and on the other the considerations relatable to customary law weighed with the authorities concerned. This, as argued, according to decisions on the Shariat side, is no more applicable. ' These submissions notwithstanding the fact remains that the question raised before the .High Court related to the appointment of a Lambardar regarding which there is no possibility of making this as exception in so far as the view already held about the maintainability of a writ petition, is concerned. It is, however, kept open (and appropriate) for the Board of Revenue and the other
---
## Page 2
authorities, to remove the remnants of the consideration's relatable to customary law and legal practices from their directions, rules and other legal instruments. With these observations we having found no justification for interference, leave to appeal, accordingly, is refused.