ABDUL GHAFFAR KHAN vs Syed ABDULLAH SHAH and another
This matter arises from a long-standing property dispute pending since 1950, which previously reached the Supreme Court and was remanded to the Member, Board of Revenue for a decision on merits. Instead of deciding the case, the Member, Board of Revenue remanded it to the Deputy Commissioner for a fresh trial. This remand order was challenged via a constitutional petition before the High Court of Baluchistan, which set aside the remand order but erroneously restored the orders of the Deputy Commissioner and Additional Commissioner rather than directing a decision on merits. The core legal question concerns the propriety of the High Court's course of action in restoring subordinate revenue orders instead of ensuring the case was decided on merits by the Board of Revenue as originally directed. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal, holding that the contention requiring the matter to be decided on merits by the appropriate revenue forum warrants further consideration, and issued directions regarding security and preparation of the appeal record.
- Whether the High Court, upon setting aside an illegal remand order passed by the Member, Board of Revenue, should remand the matter back for a decision on merits rather than restoring subordinate revenue orders?
- Can a case remanded by the Supreme Court to a specific forum for a decision on merits be disposed of by way of a further remand?
1. ' NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.--The dispute between the parties is pending since 1950 and after protracted proceedings the matter reached right upto this Court in 1985. It was disposed of by an order of this Court dated 22-12-1986 whereby the judgment of the High Court was set aside and the proceedings remanded to the Member, Board of Revenue for re-hearing of the revision petition in accordance with law. In view of the terribly long period that this dispute had being lingering on the hope was expressed that the learned Member, Board of Revenue will he able to dispose of the revision petition within two months of the receipt of this Court's decision and the records of the case.
2. ' The learned Member, Board of Revenue, however, disposed of the matter after about ten months (by his order dated 25-10-1987) but unfortunately instead of deciding it on mertis remanded the case for trial afresh to the Deputy Commissioner, Quetta, in accordance with law. This unfortunate order was challenged in the Constitutional jurisdiction before the High Court of Baluchistan at Quetta and the learned High Court was pleased to accept the Constitutional petition and set aside the order of remand passed by the Member, Board of Revenue dated 25-10-1987. However, the High Court instead of asking another Member, Board of Revenue to decide the matter on the merits decided to restore the orders passed by the Deputy Commissioner and the Additional Commissioner, Quetta Division. The case is now before us again wherein the last mentioned order of the High Court is questioned.
3. ' We have heard Mr. A.R. Sheikh in support of this petition.
4. We consider that the contention, inter alia, that the case having been remanded by this Court to the Member, Board of Revenue, the final decision was expected to be taken by it and even if the order of remand passed by the Member, Board of Revenue was found to he not justified in law the matter should have been entrusted to another Member, Board of Revenue fot its decision on merits, requires further consideration.
5. ' Security shall be furnished in the sum of Rs, 10,000.
6. ' The appeal shall be made ready on the present record with liberty to the parties to add further documents, if any and fixed for hearing during the next session of this Court at Quetta.