WALI MUHAMMAD and others vs MUHAMMAD NAZAR and others
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against a judgment of the High Court, which had exercised its constitutional jurisdiction in favor of the respondents. The dispute originated from the allotment of land to Attaullah Khan, the father of the respondents, who was a claimant from a non-agreed area. Following the promulgation of Martial Law Regulation No. 89, his allotment was reduced, requiring him to surrender a specific number of Produce Index (P.I.) units. Although he opted to purchase the surrendered area, he failed to pay any installments due to ongoing disputes regarding his actual entitlement and the extent of the land to be surrendered. When his request for a second extension to pay the purchase price was refused and he was ordered to surrender the land, he successfully challenged this in the High Court. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition for leave to appeal, affirming the High Court's view that a formal order of assumption was a necessary prerequisite before the authorities could compel the surrender of the excess land.
- Is a formal order of assumption required before authorities can compel the surrender of excess land under Martial Law Regulation No. 89?
- Can a claimant be compelled to surrender land when there is a dispute regarding the actual entitlement and the area to be surrendered?
- Martial Law Regulation No. 89
ORDER
' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.--Attaullah Khan, father of respondents Nos. 1 and 2, was a claimant from a non-agreed area. He was made an allotment equivalent to 8297 P.1 units. Subsequently, on the promulgation of Martial Law Regulation No, 89 his allotment was reduced to 2693 P.I. Units and thus he was made to surrender an area equivalent to 5734 P.I. Units. He opted to purchase the surrendered area. He did not pay any instalment of the purchase price, for, there were some dispute with regard to his actual entitlement and the area which was required to be surrendered.
He sought extension in time for the deposit of the purchase price. Initially, an extension was granted to him but when he asked for a second extension this was refused and he was directed to surrender the land. He then invoked the Constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court. A learned Single Judge accepted his petition mainly on the ground that as no order of assumption had been made, he could not be asked to surrender the excess land. The petitioners who were cultivating the land in dispute seek leave to appeal from this Court.
2. In support of this petition it is contended that as Attaullah Khan had not paid a single instalment towards the purchase price no formal order of assumption was required. After hearing the learned counsel we are unable to accept this contention. The petition is dismissed. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.