MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE vs ALLAH RAKHA And Another
This petition for leave to appeal challenged an order of a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, which had remanded a property dispute case to the Settlement Commissioner for a fresh decision. The core legal question concerned the proper determination of the nature and character of the disputed land as it existed at the time of Partition on August 14, 1947—specifically, whether it was classified as agricultural land or Sakni (urban/building) land. The petitioner had been transferred the land based on records from 1944-45 and 1950-51, which indicated agricultural usage; however, the High Court found that the critical special Jamabandi for the year 1946-47 had been overlooked. The Supreme Court held that the High Court's order of remand was legally sound and did not warrant interference, as it was necessary to resolve the factual ambiguity regarding the land's classification at the relevant time. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, with the observation that the petitioner remained at liberty to raise all available legal pleas during the remand proceedings before the Settlement Commissioner.
- Is a High Court order remanding a case to a Settlement Commissioner for fresh determination of land character subject to interference if relevant records were previously overlooked?
- Does the classification of land as agricultural or Sakni at the time of Partition require specific evidentiary findings from the relevant Jamabandi records?
ORDER
1. NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.--This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the order of a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, dated 16-12-1979, passed in Writ Petition No.472-K of 1974.
2. The learned Single Judge, by his impugned order, accepted the writ petition filed by Allah Rakha, Respondent No.1 herein, and remanded the case to the Settlement Commissioner for decision afresh 'with certain directions; the principal one being to record a considered finding with A regard to the nature and character of land at the time of the Partition, namely, 14-8-1947 i.e. Whether it was agricultural land or Sakni land.
3. The petitioner herein had been transferred the area in dispute on the footing that it was agricultural land and incoming to this conclusion reliance was placed upon a copy of the Register Haqdaran for the year 1944-45, wherein the plot was described as agricultural land and upon a copy of the Jamabandi for the year 1950-51 which also indicated that the plot in dispute was under cultivation. However, the Jamabandi which was really in point namely, the special Jamabandi for the year 1946-47 was not referred to.
4. In the above circumstances, we feel that no 'legitimate exception can be taken to the order of remand passed by the High Court which does not require any interference. The petitioner, during the remand proceedings, will, however, be at liberty to take all the pleas available to him under the law.
5. This petition, with the above observations, stands dismissed.