- Advertisement -
ISLAMABAD, Feb 04 (APP): The Federal Constitutional Court of Pakistan (FCCP) has dismissed a petition seeking enforcement of land mutations after a delay of more than one hundred years, ruling that revenue authorities have no power to correct land records in cases involving extraordinary and unexplained delay or disputed claims, and that such matters can only be decided by a civil court.
According to the detailed judgment approved for reporting, a two-member bench comprising Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi and Justice Muhammad Karim Khan Agha dismissed a petition filed by Faizullah Khan and others, while upholding the decision of the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench.
The petitioners contended that their predecessors and certain proforma respondents were owners of the disputed land on the basis of mutations sanctioned in 1907 and 1913, which were approved on the basis of a decision by a competent civil court.
However, they argued that these mutations were never implemented in the record of rights due to negligence on the part of revenue authorities and that there was now no legal impediment to their enforcement.
The court was informed that the petitioners first approached the Additional Deputy Commissioner (Revenue), Layyah, in 2020 for enforcement of the mutations, but their request was rejected.
Subsequently, the Additional Commissioner allowed the appeal and ordered enforcement of the mutations. However, the Board of Revenue, Punjab, in review proceedings, set aside that order and restored the decision of the Additional Deputy Commissioner. Later, the Lahore High Court also dismissed the constitutional petition.
In its detailed judgment, the Federal Constitutional Court held that mutations remaining unenforced for over a century could not be treated as mere clerical or arithmetic errors, particularly when multiple transactions, transfers of ownership, and third-party rights may have arisen during such a long period.
The court observed that deciding such matters without hearing affected parties would violate the principles of natural justice.
The court further clarified that under the Punjab Land Revenue Act, the powers of revenue authorities are limited, and determination of disputed ownership rights or complex factual controversies falls exclusively within the jurisdiction of civil courts.
The judgment noted that although revenue entries do not by themselves create ownership rights, they carry a presumption of correctness under the law, which can only be challenged through proper judicial proceedings.
The court also observed that the petitioners failed to provide any reasonable explanation for the delay of more than a century, bringing their claim within the doctrine of laches and acquiescence. It added that disputed and fact-intensive matters could not be adjudicated under constitutional jurisdiction.
For these reasons, the Federal Constitutional Court held that the petition did not raise any arguable question of law and accordingly dismissed the petition, refusing leave to appeal.