Pakistan Case Lawโ† Search
1987 SCMR 831

GHULAM RASOOL vs MEMBER BOARD OF REVENUE And Other

Citation1987 SCMR 831
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 397 of 1980 Writ Petition No.
Judge(s)Aslam Riaz Hussain, Saad Saood Jan
ResultPetition dismissed

SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.-- This is a petition for special leave to appeal from the order dated 27-1-1980 of the Lahore High Court dismissing the constitutional petition of the petitioner against the order of the revenue authorities in consolidation proceedings.

2. On a remand made by the Board of Revenue the Collector effected certain changes in the consolidation scheme. The petitioner filed an appeal challenging the order of the Collector. The appeal was out of time by about two years. The petitioner moved an application for condonation of the delay. His main excuse was that he was ill and for that reason he could not lodge the appeal within time. The Additional Commissioner who was seized of the appeal did not find this explanation as satisfactory. He dismissed the application for condonation of delay and also the appeal on the ground that it was barred by time. The petitioner moved a revision petition before the Board of Revenue. A learned Member of the Board rejected the revision petition maintaining the order passed by the Additional Commissioner. The petitioner filed a review application but without any success. He then invoked the constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court. That too was dismissed. He now seeks leave to appeal from this Court.

3. It is not disputed that the appeal of the petitioner before the Additional Commissioner was filed when the limitation had expired. The Additional Commissioner rejected the explanation offered by the petitioner for condonation of the delay as satisfactory. It was a matter well within his competence. His order in this regard was upheld by the Board of Revenue. The High Court, therefore, very properly declined to interfere with the orders of the Board of Revenue and the Additional Commissioner. We see no merit in this petition which is hereby dismissed.

For educational and research use only โ€” not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
DisclaimerยทPrivacyยทTermsยทSearch