C.P.No.D-1217 of 2013

1. For orders on office objection

2. For Katcha Peshi

02.12.2015

Mr. Alam Sher Bozdar Advocate for petitioner.

Mr. Liaqat Ali Shar, Additional Advocate General.

...............

Through instant petition, the petitioner has alleged that the request of the petitioner for demarcation of his land has not been considered by the Revenue authorities, whereas, according to petitioner, respondent No.5 has illegally occupied the land of the petitioner.

Pursuant to Court notice, comments have been filed on behalf of respondents, whereas, as per comments of respondent No.3, the allegation of the petitioner has been denied and it has been stated that the request of the petitioner for demarcation of his land has already been considered, whereafter, report was prepared and the area found in excess by petitioner and respondent No.5 were separated on the spot and sketch was prepared. It will be advantageous to reproduce the relevant para 5 of the comments submitted by the Mukhtiarkar, Revenue, Rohri, which reads as follows:

“That as regards para No.8 and 9, it is submitted that the application for demarcation and measurement made by petitioner was processed as per rules, during the year 2010 and the lands of the petitioner and respondent No.5 were got measured and demarcated with the technical assistance of field staff of respondent No.4 (Survey Superintendent, Khairpur) in presence of both the parties viz. the petitioner and respondent No.5 and in result thereof the lands found in excess possession of each party were separated on spot. Such copy of joint report and site sketch prepared by the Survey and Revenue Staff are attached as annexure “A” as such no further action requires to be taken by the office of respondent No.3.”

It appears that that the request of the petitioner for demarcation of land has already been considered, whereas, report has been submitted and sketch has also been prepared.

While confronted with such position, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent No.5 is still occupying some of the land of the petitioner, however, submits that he will seek appropriate remedy in accordance with law against such action on the part of the respondent No.5.

Accordingly, instant petition is disposed of, however, petitioner will be at liberty to seek further remedy in accordance with law by filing appropriate proceedings before proper forum.

JUDGE

JUDGE

N.M.