Pakistan Case Lawโ† Search
2004 CLC 681

MUHAMMAD NAWAZ vs MUHAMMAD ALI and another

Citation2004 CLC 681
CourtBoard of Revenue
Case No.R.O.R. No,30 of 1991
Date2003-04-08
Judge(s)Muhammad Zia-Ur-Rehman
ResultOrder accordingly

ORDER

' This matter was remanded to the Board of Revenue by the Honourable Lahore High Court for decision afresh after hearing the parties in accordance with law. The question involved is creation of an additional 'Patti' of Lambardar in Chak No,563/GB, Tehsil Jaranwala. The District Officer (Revenue), Faisalabad was directed to visit the Chak, hear the parties/respectables and to send a detailed report with specific recommendations on the following points:--

(a) What is the justification for creation of an additional 'Patti' when 4 Lambardars are already there in the village?

(b) The composition of groups/castes in the village should be examined critically in order to ascertain the admissibility of having a Lambardar on ethnic, religious or political basis.

2. The report received indicates that total area of the Chak is 2322 Acres, 6 Kanals, 11 Marlas in which 4 Lambardars are already working. The majority of Pattidars is not in favour of creation of an additional `Patti'. After hearing the parties at length and going through the report of District Officer (Revenue), I have come to the conclusion that creation of additional 'Patti' on religious basis would be a bad precedent. The area and revenue of the. 'Patti' in question does not qualify for its bifurcation into two 'Patties' under the law on the subject. In view of this, the request for creation of additional 'Patti' is rejected with direction to the District Officer (Revenue) to proceed further for appointment of a permanent Lambardar of the 'Patti' in question strictly in accordance with law. In case, any Pattidar does not like to pay Government dues to the permanent Lambardar so appointed, his holding may be included in the Dalbash of the Lambardar of the adjoining 'Patti'.

With these observations, the order of the lower Courts are set aside and the revision petition disposed of.

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