Pakistan Case LawAHMAD MUMTAZ and 10 others Versus SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER(L) and 5
This petition for leave to appeal challenged a judgment of the Lahore High Court, which had upheld an order by the Chief Settlement Commissioner cancelling the allotment of agricultural land to the petitioners' predecessor-in-interest, Faiz Muhammad, due to an excess of 2919 P.I. Units. The excess land was subsequently allotted to respondents as informers. The petitioners contended that the department had committed errors in the arithmetical calculation of the land entitlement. The Supreme Court reviewed the matter and determined that the High Court had thoroughly examined the calculation aspect in the impugned judgment. The Supreme Court held that arithmetical calculations regarding land entitlement cannot be re-adjudicated through the exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction. Consequently, the Court refused leave to appeal. However, the Court clarified that the petitioners remained at liberty to approach the relevant department to point out any specific arithmetical mistakes in the calculation, provided that such representations do not challenge the merits of the case, such as the classification or type of land originally allotted.
- Can arithmetical calculations regarding land entitlement be challenged through the exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction?
- Is it permissible to challenge the merits of a land allotment decision under the guise of correcting arithmetical errors?
ORDER
AJMAL MIAN, J.---This is a petition for leave to appeal against the judgment dated 30-11-1992 of a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court in Writ Petition No, 136-R of 1977 filed by the petitioners impugning Chief Settlement Commissioner's Order dated 30-9-1976 whereby he ordered cancellation of the allotment of agricultural land to the extent of 2919 P.I Units on account of excess. The above excess land from the allotment of Faiz Muhammad claimant, predecessor-in- interest of the present petitioners, was ordered to be allotted to respondent No, 2 and others as informer, dismissing the same. The petitioners have, therefore, filed present petition for leave to appeal.
2.In support of the above petition Choudhry Khurshid Ahmad, learned Advocate Supreme Court appearing for the petitioners, has vehemently contended that the arithmetical calculation has wrongly been made by the department.
In our view the learned Judge in Chambers has thoroughly dealt with the above aspect in the impugned judgment and, therefore, no exception can A be taken. Even otherwise arithmetical calculation made for the purpose of computing the entitlement of Faiz Muhammad cannot be done in exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction.
3.Leave is refused. However, it will be open to the petitioners to point out any arithmetical mistake in calculation of the Department and not any other alleged mistake on merits of the case including as to type of land allotted etc.
Judges on this bench
- Ajmal Mian2,984 judgments
- Wali Muhammad Khan585 judgments