MUHAMMAD SHAFI vs MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE And Other
This matter concerns twenty-eight consolidated civil appeals arising from disputes over the acquisition of proprietary rights in State land leased under the 'Grow More Food Scheme' of 1955-56. The core legal controversy involved whether lessees who were denied the option to purchase land due to specific restrictive conditions—specifically that leases must have expired before 1961—were entitled to relief. While the High Court initially dismissed petitions challenging these restrictions, a subsequent Bench took a contrary view, allowing such claims. During the pendency of the appeals before the Supreme Court, the Provincial Government of the Punjab revised its policy via a letter dated April 26, 1971, extending the offer to acquire proprietary rights to all allottees under the scheme, regardless of lease expiry dates. Consequently, the Government conceded the lessees' claims and sought to withdraw its own appeals. The Supreme Court allowed the appeals filed by the lessees and permitted the withdrawal of the appeals filed by the Provincial Government, thereby settling the dispute in accordance with the Government's revised policy.
- Does a subsequent change in government policy regarding the acquisition of proprietary rights for State land allottees render pending litigation moot?
- Can the Provincial Government withdraw appeals filed by it against a High Court judgment if it has adopted a new policy that concedes the underlying claim?
MUHAMMAD AFZAL CHEEMA, J.--These 28 Civil Appeals are connected matters having a common background and involving identical questions. They are disposed of by a consolidated short order, the controversy having been cut short owing to a concession made on behalf of the Government of the Punjab. Nine of-these appeals were filed by private persons either against the defunct- Province of West Pakistan or the Board of Revenue while the rest were filed by the Provincial Government and the Board of Revenue
2. The short background of the cases is that in order to meet food shortage and give an impetus to food production in the country sometime in 1955-56 the Provincial Government framed a scheme known as the Grow More Food Scheme under which all available plots of State land in colony districts were leased out for self-cultivation to various persons initially for a period of five years. It was later decided to offer to the lessees having small holdings the option to acquire proprietary rights in their tenancies by means of private treaty, subject to the to-fold condition that the lease should have expired before 1961 and the land should not fall within five miles' radius from a Mandi Town or a Municipality. It appears that some lessees who would, otherwise, have been eligible for acquisition of proprietary rights were inevitably prevented from purchasing the land for no fault of theirs, inasmuch as they could not get vacant possession of the land immediately after the order of allotment in their favour in Rabi 1956 and were thus hit by the condition, apparently having no reasonable basis for its prescription, that their lease should not extend beyond 1961. Being thus denied "the concession to purchase" the land some of them having unsuccessfully approached the Revenue Authorities in the first instance invoked the writ jurisdiction of the High Court. Their Writ Petition No.684 of 1960 was dismissed by a D . B . Of the former High Court of West Pakistan vide order, dated 15-7-1966. Eight of these appeals have arisen out of this judgment. Subsequently, however, similar Writ Petition No.658 of 1966 filed by some other lessees under the Grow More Food Scheme, who were likewise denied the concession to purchase the land was listed before another Bench of the same High Court which disagreeing with the earlier decision accepted the writ petition vide order, dated 26-7-1968 reported as Muhammad Ashraf v. Board of Revenue PLD 1968 Lah. 1155. It was held that the offer of the "concession of sale", made by the Government vide letter, dated 28-6-1962 issued by the Board of Revenue was available to the petitioners notwithstanding the fact that the terminus a quo of the lease in their case was subsequent to Rabi 1956. The Province of West Pakistan in Civil Appeals Nos. 265 challenged this judgment to 267 of 1971 and by the Board of Revenue in Civil Appeals Nos. 50 to 66 of 1971.
3. Having once challenged the judgment of the High Court, it appears that the Provincial Government had a second thought and revising its previous policy issued a fresh policy letter No.1488-71/1217-CL-III, dated the 26th of April, 1971, whereby regardless of the the of expiry of the lease all allottees of State land under Grow More Food Scheme were offered the choice of acquiring proprietary rights subject to fulfillment of the terms and conditions of the grant. It is in view of this decision of the Provincial Government that the Assistant Advocate-General appearing on behalf of the Provincial Government does not contest the appeals filed by the lessees. For the same reason he seeks permission to withdraw the appeals filed by the Government or the Board of Revenue.
4. In view of the above position, appeals mentioned at Serial Nos. (1) to (8) are allowed while appeals at Serial Nos. (9) to (28) are dismissed as having been withdrawn. There shall be no order as to costs.
Cited by 5 cases
- Nihal Khan and others vs Province of Sindh and others 2024 SHC 1380
- Nausher vs Province of Punjab through District Collector, Khanewal and another 2022 PLD Supreme Court 699
- MUHAMMAD KHAN etc. vs PROVINCE OF PUNJAB, etc. 2007 PLJ SC 1031
- MUHAMMAD KHAN and others Versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB 2007 SCMR 1169
- Nausher vs Province of Punjab through District Collector, Khanewal & 2022 SCP 212