Mst. ZUBAIDA BEGUM vs MEMBER (JUDICIAL). BOARD OF REVENUE, PUNJAB
This constitutional petition arises from a dispute over the appointment of a successor Lumbardar following the death of the previous holder. The petitioner, daughter of the deceased Lumbardar, and respondent No. 2, the brother of the deceased, competed for the office. The District Collector appointed the petitioner, a decision affirmed by the Commissioner on appeal. However, the Member, Board of Revenue set aside these concurrent orders in revision, relying on rule 19(2)(d) of the Land Revenue Rules, 1968 to disqualify the petitioner solely on the ground of being a female. The core legal question was whether disqualifying a woman from holding the office of Lumbardar under the Land Revenue Rules violates fundamental constitutional rights. The Lahore High Court held that rule 19(2)(d) of the Land Revenue Rules, 1968 is violative of Article 25 of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973 as it discriminates against women solely on the basis of gender, as settled by prior authoritative judgments. Consequently, the High Court accepted the writ petition, declared the impugned order of the Board of Revenue without lawful authority, and restored the concurrent orders of the District Collector and the Commissioner appointing the petitioner.
- Whether rule 19(2)(d) of the Land Revenue Rules, 1968 violates Article 25 of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973 by discriminating against women?
- Can a female be disqualified from the appointment of Lumbardar solely on the ground of her gender?
- What is the evidentiary weight to be attached to the opinion of the District Collector in the appointment of a Lumbardar?
- Rule 19(2)(d), Land Revenue Rules 1968
- Article 25, Constitution of Pakistan 1973
On the death of Abbas Ali, Lumbardar of Chak No,263/R.B. Tehsil and District Faisalabad on 2-3- 1968, proceedings were commenced for appointment of the successor Lumbardar in the said revenue estate. Inter alia, the petitioner and respondent No,2 applied for appointment. The petitioner is the daughter of the said Abbas Ali deceased while respondent No,2 is the brother of the said deceased Lumbardar. The District Collector vide an order dated 28-8-1990 (Annex-A) appointed the petitioner as a Lumbardar. Respondent No,2 filed an appeal who dismissed the same on -27-1-1991. A revision petition filed by respondent No,2, however, was allowed by the learned respondent No,1 on 2-8-1994.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the impugned order is violative of the law laid down in the case of Mst. Nasreen Iqbal v. Member (Revenue), Board of Revenue (PLD 1993 Lahore 423) which judgment has since been upheld by the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan vide a judgment dated 15-5-1994 in. Civil Petition No,828 of 1993. No one has turned up for the respondent No,2 who is represented by Hafiz Muharnmad Yousaf, Advocate whose name stands duly listed in the Cause List for today but no one has turned up despite repeated calls. He is. therefore, proceeded against ex parte.
3. I have gone through the several documents placed on record of this Writ petition, with the assistance of the learned counsel. By now it is well-settled that in the matter of appointment of a Lumbardar the opinion of the District Collector holds much weight. I find that after comparing the comparative merits of the two candidates, he found that apart from the fact that she is daughter of the deceased Lumbardar she is residing in Chak No,263/R.B. where her children are studying and that after the death of her father she had been performing the duties of a Lumbardar. The only objection before the respondent No,2 was that she is a female being a non-resident of the said Chak, is not a fit person to be appointed as a Lumbardar. The learned District Collector found the fact that the petitioner is resident of Chak and proceeded to appoint her as Lumbardar. The learned Commissioner while dealing with the appeal of the respondent No,2 agreed with the Collector. The learned Member. Board of Revenue proceeded to set aside the order only with reference to. rule 19(2)(d) of the Land Revenue Rules, 1968. The precise reason is that she is a female. Now the matter stands settled in the case of Shrin Munir and others v. Government of the Punjab through Secretary Health, Lahore and another (PLD 1990 SC 295) whereby any discrimination against women for the sole reason that they are women, B has been held to be violative of Article 25 of the Constitution. Now on the same touchstone the said rule 19(2)(d) of the Land Revenue Rules, 1968 has been held to be violative of the said provisions of the Constitution by the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan while disallowing Civil Petition No,828/L of 1993 against the said judgment of this Court being relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner. I, therefore, do find that the learned respondent No,1 while passing the impugned order has proceeded in violation of the law as laid down by the superior judiciary of the country and his order is without lawful authority.
4. This writ petition is accordingly allowed and the impugned order of respondent No,1 dated 2-8- 1994 is declared to be without lawful authority and as such void. The result would be that the orders passed by the District Collector and upheld by the Commissioner, Faisalabad Division on 27-1-1991 shall hold the field.
5. No orders as to the costs.
Cited by 3 cases
- Muhammad Anwar vs Muhammad Ikhlas etc. 2015 LHC 4457
- Muhammad Anwar vs Muhammad Ikhlas, etc 2015 C.L.R. 1368
- MUHAMMAD ANWAR vs MUHAMMAD IKHLAS and 6 other 2016 PLD Lahore 262