Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: GHULAM HAIDER KHAN VS Respondent: MUHAMMAD ALI KHAN
P L D 1960 W
P L D 1960 W. P. (Rev.) 22
Before M. W. Abbasi, Member Board of Revenue,
West Pakistan
GHULAM HAIDER KHAN‑Appellant
versus
MUHAMMAD ALI KHAN and others‑Respondents
Revision Side No. 211 of 1958‑59, decided on 24th November 1959, District Mianwali.
Punjab Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1887), S. 15 (1) (a)‑Order giving sanction to review an order‑Not appeal able : [3 P R 1912 (Rev.) ref.]
ORDER
This purports to be a second appeal against an order of Additional Commissioner, Dera Ismail Khan passed in a partition case relating to village Sheikhani, Tehsil Bhakar.
2. The partition was sanctioned by an Assistant Collector 1st grade on 17‑12‑1956. The petitioner, however, applied to the Collector for review of this order. The Collector asked for the Assistant Collector's report; the Assistant Collector recommended the application and the Collector granted permission to the Assistant Collector to review his order of 17‑12‑1956. Respondent Mohammad Ali Khan took the matter up to the Additional Commissioner in appeal, and the Additional Commissioner set aside the order of the Collector, revolting the permission given by him for review of the Assistant Collector's order.
3. The application before the Collector was an application for review; and his order was quite clearly an order under section 15 (1) of the Land Revenue Act. But an order under a section 15 (1) is an interlocutory order which is not appeal able on the very good ground that the party affected by it has right to challenge the final order in appeal. In fact, 3 P R 1912 (Rev.) A wherein it was laid down that sanction to review given under section 15 (1) is not "an order" for purposes of appeal, is on ail fours with this case.
4. It would not be appropriate for me to go further into the facts of the case as this might have the effect of prejudging the review proceedings; but I have no doubt that the Additional Commissioner was not correct in entertaining the appeal; and his order must be treated as incompetent and void.
5. The result is that I set aside the Additional Commissioner's order and restore the sanction granted by the Collector to review the Assistant Collector's order of 17‑12‑1956.
A. H. Order set aside.