FAIZ BAKHSH and others vs MULTAN MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, MULTAN
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against concurrent findings of the trial court, the Additional District Judge, and the High Court, which dismissed the petitioners' suit for a permanent injunction to restrain the Municipal Corporation, Multan, from ejecting them from land designated as a graveyard. The petitioners, who are grave-diggers, claimed ownership of a portion of the land recorded as 'ghair mumkin abadi' within the Khasra, asserting long-standing possession. The core legal question was whether the petitioners could establish ownership or possessory rights over land officially declared a graveyard under the Municipal Corporation Ordinance. The Supreme Court held that the petitioners failed to provide evidence that their occupation was in any capacity other than as licensees performing their duties as grave-diggers. The Court affirmed the lower courts' findings, noting that the existence of houses on graveyard land by grave-diggers is not inconsistent with the land's status as a graveyard. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, establishing that occupation of graveyard land by grave-diggers does not confer proprietary rights absent evidence of a non-licensee status.
- Does the occupation of a portion of a graveyard by grave-diggers for residential purposes automatically confer ownership rights?
- Can a licensee performing duties as a grave-digger claim adverse possession against a Municipal Corporation over graveyard land?
- Is the presence of houses on a portion of land designated as a graveyard in revenue records sufficient to prove that the land is not part of the graveyard?
- Section 93(2), Municipal Corporation Ordinance 1979
ORDER
' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.--The petitioners are grave-diggers. They occupied a portion of Khasra No,1255 in village Taraf Ismail, Multan. By a notification issued under section 93(2) of the Municipal Corporation Ordinance, the Commissioner, Multan Division, declared the said Khasra as a graveyard and vested its maintenance and administration in the Municipal Committee, Multan. On 16-4-1978, the petitioners filed a suit for a permanent injunction to restrain the Municipal Corporation, Multan, from ejecting them from the portions in their possession. The suit was dismissed by the trial Court and the petitioners' appeal before the Additional District Judge and revision petition before the High Court failed. They now seek leave to appeal from this Court.
2. The earliest jamabandi which has been placed on the record relates to the year 1951-52. In this jamabandi the area of the Khasra has been recorded as 71 kanals and 14 marlas. Out of this, 69 kanals and 9 marlas has been shown as graveyard and the remaining area as ghair mumkin abadi. The case of the petitioners is that their houses are located in that part of the khasra which has been recorded as ghair mumkin abadi.
3. In support of this petition, it is contended that the decision of the High Court as well as the subordinate Courts that the whole of the khasra was a graveyard is against the entries in the Revenue record; that the petitioners have remained in possession of that part of the khasra which is shown as ghair mumkin abadi for more than 80/85 years, have constructed their houses thereon and are owners thereof.
4. After hearing the learned counsel, we find no merits in this contention.According to jamabandi for the year 1951-52, the whole khasra is part of the shamilat-e-deh. The existence of the houses of the grave-diggers on a part of the khasra is not unnatural. There is no evidence on the record that they had been permitted to occupy a part of the graveyard in a capacity other than as licensee to perform their function as grave-digger. We would therefore dismiss this petition.