PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

MUHAMMAD PERVAIZ SULTAN vs MUHAMMAD SHAFIQ Rr — 2025 CLC 1447 BOARD-OF-REVENUE-PUNJAB

Case information

Citation
2025 CLC 1447 BOARD-OF-REVENUE-PUNJAB
Year
2025
Reporter
CLC
Parties
MUHAMMAD PERVAIZ SULTAN vs MUHAMMAD SHAFIQ Rr

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

MUHAMMAD PERVAIZ SULTAN VS MUHAMMAD SHAFIQ Rr. 17 & 22---Pakistan Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Rules, 1976, R. 175---Village Headman (lambardar), appointment of---Candidature of an advocate---Scope---Petitioner (erstwhile lambardar wanting his son to be new lambardar) challenged appointment of the respondent as new lambardar replacing him (petitioner)---Argument against new appointment was that the respondent, being a practicing lawyer, was disqualified to be appointed as the lambardar as per Section 175 of the Pakistan Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Rules, 1976 ('the Rules 1976')---Validity---From provisions of Rule 175 of the Rules 1976, it is clear that the bar contemplated by the said Rule (175) pertains to certain professions, business and service etc. as are understood in their ordinary and technical/legal sense---However, the office of lambardar (Headman) is neither a profession or business nor service etc. but it is an administrative post of its own kind by virtue whereof a suitable person in the Chak is saddled with certain duties and responsibilities attached to such post as are enumerated, inter alia, in Rule 22 of the Land Revenue Rules, 1968---In the present day, educational edge of a candidate is quite a relevant factor which ,when considered with other qualifications of a candidate, must be given due weightage---Therefore, it is misconceived that a practicing lawyer cannot be appointed as a lambardar---Member-Board of Revenue upheld he impugned orders, appointing the respondent as lambardar (Village Headman), passed by the District Collector as well as the Commissioner---Revision petition filed by erstwhile lamardar, being merit-less, was dismissed in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2025 CLC

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English