KHUSHI MUHAMMAD vs MUHAMMAD YAHYA AND Other
This matter comes before the Supreme Court of Pakistan via a petition directed against an order of the Lahore High Court dated 28-6-1981, which dismissed the petitioner's constitutional petition in a settlement matter. The petitioner held a verified claim of produce index units and had been transferred land accordingly, with a small balance remaining unsatisfied. Sixteen years later, Settlement Authorities divided a contiguous piece of land and transferred portions of it to both the petitioner and a respondent to satisfy their respective remaining produce index units. The core legal question concerned whether the High Court erred in upholding the transfer and dismissal of the constitutional petition. The Supreme Court held that the petitioner failed to make out any good ground for interference, finding that the transfer of land by the Settlement Authorities to satisfy the remaining produce index units was just and proper under the circumstances. Consequently, the Court refused to grant leave to appeal and dismissed the petition, laying down the principle that discretionary interference in settlement matters will be withheld where the administrative allocation of land to satisfy verified claims is found to be just and proper.
- Whether the Supreme Court will interfere with a High Court order dismissing a constitutional petition in a settlement matter where the transfer of land is found to be just and proper?
- Does the possession of contiguous land create a preferential right to allotment over the adjustment of verified produce index units by Settlement Authorities?
ORDER
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.-This petition is directed against the order of the Lahore High Court dated 28.6-1981, dismissing the petitioner's constitu--tional petition in a settlement matter.
2. The petitioner had a verified claim of 336 PIUs. In 1956 he was transferred 30 kanals of land in Village Fatehgarh, Tehsil and District Sialkot equivalent to 327 PIUs. Nine P. I. Us however, still remain unsatisfied. The petitioner had in his possession another piece of land (Khasra No. 95) measuring 3 kanals and 15 marlas contiguous to the land transferred to him against his claim. Sixteen years later, on 17-10-1972, the Settlement Authorities divided Khasra Number 95 into two parts, namely No. 95/2 min and 95/3 min, and transferred Khasra No. 95/3 min measuring 2 kanals and 19 marlas, to Muhammad Yahya respondent, against his 24 PIUs. Which had not yet been satisfied, and transferred Khasra' No. 95/2 min measuring 16 marlas to the petitioner against his remaining 9 P. I.
Us.
3. We have gone through the judgment and heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. He has not been able to make out any good ground for interference in the impugned order. Moreover, the transfer of 16 marlas of land to the petitioner against his 9 PIU by the Settlement Authorities, is in the circumstances of the case, quite just and proper. We do not, therefore, consider this to be a fit case for grant of leave. The petition is consequently dismissed.