GHOUS MUHAMMAD vs MUHAMMAD ZAFAR ULLAH KHAN Chap — 2025 CLC 1614 BOARD-OF-REVENUE-PUNJAB

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

GHOUS MUHAMMAD VS MUHAMMAD ZAFAR ULLAH KHAN Chap. XI, S. 135---Letter No. PMU(BOR)/D-O/66/2014 dated 27.02.2014 issued by the Project Management Unit of the Board of Revenue, Punjab---Partition proceedings---Merger/pooling (consolidation) of Khatas, seeking of---Permissibility---Petitioners were owners in multiple (as many as four ) Khatas---In order to partition their land, they requested for consolidation/merger/ pooling (??????) of their Khatas---But the request of petitioners for consolidation/merger was not entertained and the mode of partition was finalized without consolidation of Khatas---The matter of consolidation/merger/ pooling (??????) of the Khatas of the petitioners had gone all the way up to level of the Member, Board of Revenue, Punjab---The Courts below, while relying on Letter No. 2014/66/D-0/BOR/PMU dated 27.02.2014 issued by Project Management Unit of Board of Revenue, Punjab, held that consolidation of Khatas cannot be permitted since every Khata is a separate entity and must be partitioned separately---Question as to whether or not the consolidation of khatas is permitted under the Land Revenue Act, 1967?---Held: In the present case, the petitioner has raised a compelling practical concern; which confirms that all co-sharers of the impugned khatas have voluntarily expressed their explicit and uncontested consent to merge and pool their holdings---No party has raised any legal or factual objection---Imposing an unqualified prohibition in these circumstances is not only inequitable but also counterproductive to the objectives of just partition---A blanket ban creates procedural deadlocks, forcing repetitive and technical proceedings, and defeats the fundamental aim of revenue administration, which is to reflect accurate and agreed-upon ownership and possession --- The principle "ubi jus ibi remedium-where there is a right, there must be a remedy" clearly supports the petitioner's case---Ownership rights of co-sharers in the land are undisputed, yet the denial of merger or pooling, despite mutual agreement, effectively deprives them of a practicable remedy---When procedural obstacles obstruct the enforcement of rightful possession or fair partition, the law must intervene to restore balance---The Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1967, while detailed in its regulation of partition under Chap. XI, remains silent on the subject of merger or pooling of khatas---Said legislative silence must not be misconstrued as a prohibition---The Latin maxim "Quod lex non prohibet, licitum est" (which the law does not prohibit, it permits) clearly applies---Thus, while clearly the Land Revenue Act, 1967, is silent in regard to consolidation of khatas/khewats, yet a complete ban on the same should not be allowed to continue---Subject to certain safeguards, pooling or merger of khatas shall be deemed a permissible administrative and judicial act in appropriate cases---Member Judicial, Board of Revenue, Punjab, set-aside the impugned order, maintaining orders/judgments of Courts below, passed by the predecessor of this court; and ordered the Khatas-in-question to be merged / consolidated; and the case was remanded to the competent Revenue Officer for fresh proceedings---Review petition was accepted accordingly.

GHOUS MUHAMMAD vs MUHAMMAD ZAFAR ULLAH KHAN Chap — 2025 CLC 1614 BOARD-OF-REVENUE-PUNJAB

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 CLC