ORDER SHEET

LAHORE HIGH COURT MULTAN BENCH MULTAN

(JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT)
Writ Petition No.11146/2012.

Muhammad Hussain & others versus Government of Punjab etc

S.No.of order/ Date of order/ Order with signature of Judge, and that of parties or counsel,
proceeding Proceeding where necessary

12.09.2012 Mr. Khadim Nadeem Malik, Adv., for the

petitioners in Writ Petition No.11146/2012.
Mehr Khalil-ur-Rehman, Adv., for the petitioners in
Writ Petition No.11289/2012.
Mr. Zafarullah Khan Khakwani, AAG.
Mr. Nadeem Ahmad Tehsildar, Kabirwala and
Muhammad Khalid, Head Clerk, A.C. Office,
Kabirwala.

This order shall dispose of Writ Petition

No.11146/2012 (Muhammad Hussain and others vs.
Government of the Punjab and others) and Writ Petition
No.11289/2012 (Muhammad Safdar and another vs.
Province of Punjab and others) involving common question
of law and facts.
2. Petitioners have invoked the Constitutional
jurisdiction of this Court under Article 199 seeking a
declaration that advertisement for appointment of Patwaris
in Tehsil Kabirwala published in daily “The Khabrain” and
daily “The Express” dated 17.08.2012 is illegal, without
lawful authority, without jurisdiction, violative to the
provisions of land Records Manual, having no legal effect
whatsoever as against the rights of the petitioners and liable
to set aside.
3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the
petitioners that in terms of Para 3.6 of Land Records
Manual a list of Patwar-pass persons is maintained at Sub-
Writ Petition No.13958/2012 2

Divisional level to facilitate the filling up of the vacancies

of Patwaris; that Para 3.12 of the Manual ibid further
stipulates that candidates who have not passed the Patwar
examination must not be posted. It is further argued by
learned counsel for the petitioners that academic
qualification required in the advertisement in question is
ICS Second Division (Grade-B) or Intermediate Second
Division with Computer Typing Speed (English) @ 40
words per minute; that the condition of passing Patwar
Course as manifested in the afore-noted Paras of the Land
Records Manual has been omitted in the advertisement
furnishing a cause of grievance to the petitioners who have
passed the Patwar Course, hence these petitions. He has
made reliance upon (i) Mst. Mumtaz Begum through
Legal heirs And others vs. Muhammad Shafique and
others (PLD 2009 Lahore 418) (ii) Ibrar Hussain vs
Assistant Commissioner, Gujjar Khan and 3 others
(2003 YLR 492-Lahore) and (iii) Akhtar Hussain vs.
Assistant Commissioner/Collector, Sub-Division, Kasur
and 9 others (1996 PLC (C.S.) 943-Lahore).
4. District Collector, Khanewal/respondent No.4 and
Assistant Commissioner Kabirwala/respondent No.5 in
their parawise comments have submitted that in compliance
of the order dated 26.5.2010 passed by this Court in writ
Petition No.4345/2003 one Muhammad Ajmal Waseem
was appointed as Patwari, however Civil Appeal No.403-
L/2011 was filed by the Revenue Department before the
Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. Hon’ble Apex Court
vide judgment dated 26.3.2012 accepted the appeal and set
aside the order of this Court dated 26.05.2010 with the
following direction:-
“5. In view of the above, this appeal is allowed and the
impugned judgment is set aside. It is however, directed that
the vacancies for the post of Patwari in Tehsil Kabir Wala
Writ Petition No.13958/2012 3

District Khanewal shall be filled through the requirement

process prescribed in the relevant rules within 5 months of
the receipt of this judgment and the respondent shall be
allowed to compete for the post in question if he is
otherwise qualified to do so.”

In the parawise comments it is further submitted that in

compliance with the above quoted order of the Hon’ble
Apex Court, the Secretary (Revenue) Board of Revenue,
Punjab, Lahore was requested to seek permission for the
recruitment of Patwaris against 24 vacant posts in Tehsil
Kabirwala; that the Board of Revenue Punjab Lahore
conveyed the relaxation of Ban imposed on fresh
recruitment vide letter dated 12.7.2012; that the post of
Patwari was upgraded from BPS-7 to BPS-9 vide
Notification dated 10.11.2009 and the Punjab Revenue
Department (Revenue Administration Posts) Rules, 2009
were repealed vide Government of the Punjab Services and
General Administrative Department Notification dated
07.01.2010; that Service Rules, 2009 were further amended
vide Government of the Punjab Notification dated
02.06.2011 declaring the basic qualification for the post of
Patwari (BS-9) as ‘ICS’ (IInd Division/Grade-B) or
Intermediate (IInd Division) from the recognized Board and
40 WPM Typing Speed (English on computer); that in
compliance with the order passed by the Hon’ble Apex
Court the post was advertised as prescribed in the relevant
Rules; that before framing of the Rules 2009 the basic
qualification for the post of Patwari (BPS-5) was
matriculation with Patwar Pass Course but consequent upon
upgradation of the post in BPS-9, Service Rules 1990 were
repealed and as per Service Rules, 2009 now the basic
qualification for the said post is ‘ICS (IInd Division/Grade-
B) or Intermediate (IInd Division) from the recognized
Board and 40 WPM Typing Speed (English on Computer)
Writ Petition No.13958/2012 4

therefore the petitioners lacking qualification are not

entitled to be considered for the said post. It is further
argued by the learned AAG in attendance that according to
the Service Rules 2009 the age limit for the post of Patwari
is 18 to 25 years and the Government of Punjab has also
granted relaxation in upper age of 5 years whereas all the
petitioners exceeding age of 30 years are otherwise not
eligible for the post.
5. Arguments heard. Record perused.
6. At the outset, it may be expedient to reproduce
hereunder Para 3.11 of the Land Records Manual dealing
with the appointment of Patwari which has been omitted
vide correction slip No.6/89 Land Records Manual dated
18th October, 1989:-
“3.11. Appointment of Patwaris: The appointment of
Patwaris rests with the Collector who may delegate these
powers to Sub-Divisional Officers (now Assistant
Commissioners)/Additional Collectors and Revenue
Assistants in the District.
(2) When the office of Patwari is vacant in any circle,
whether temporarily or permanently or permanently, it shall
be filled by selection from the register of candidates of the
Tehsil in which the vacancy occurs, or, if necessary, by
selection from the registers of other adjacent Tehsils,
regard being had to the consideration mentioned in
paragraph 287 of the Land Administration Manual. No
particular class of men should be allowed to absorb too
many Patwarships.
(3) Not less than one out of every two appointments
shall be given to candidates who are agriculturists;
provided that such candidates are available, qualified and
suitable.
(4) Priority of entry in the register or of date of passing
the Patwari examination should be taken into account, but
the Collector may select any qualified candidate whom he
considers most suitable for the vacancy, bearing in mind
the circumstances of that vacancy and also those of the
villages of the circle. The Collector will consider any
representations, made by the agriculturists of the circle in
the matter of the appointment.”

7. It is pertinent to mention that before omitting the

above quoted Para appointment of the Patwari was
regulated through West Pakistan (Northern Zone) Patwar
Writ Petition No.13958/2012 5

Subordinate Service Rules, 1963. However, after omitting

the above quoted Para 3.11, Government of the Punjab
Services and General Administration Department vide
Notification dated 13.6.1990 enforced the Revenue
Department (Revenue Administration Posts) Rules, 1990.
By virtue of the said Notification, West Pakistan (Northern
Zone) Patwar Subordinate Service Rules, 1963 were
repealed. It is evident on the record that later on vide
Government of the Punjab, S&GAD Department
(Regulations Wing) Notification dated 7.1.2010, Punjab
Revenue Department (Revenue Administration Posts)
Rules, 2009 were enforced and by virtue of the same
Notification the Punjab Revenue Department (Revenue
Administration Posts) Rules 1990 were repealed. There is
no cavil to the proposition that at present above quoted
Rules of 2009 are holding the field. It is noteworthy that
Government of the Punjab for the last so many years
through its own source as well as with the help of
International Organizations is striving to computerize the
revenue record of various districts in the province. It
therefore appears that to meet the object of computerization
of the record, the Rules with regard to Revenue
Administration Posts including Patwaris were accordingly
enforced in 2009. In view of the above maintenance of list
of Patwar-pass candidates in terms of Para 3.6 and 3.12 of
the Land Records Manual has lost its efficacy with efflux of
time and to meet the requirements in this age of
Information Technology for the purpose of computerization
of the Revenue Record.
8. Besides, it is also important to note that Hon’ble
Apex Court in the order dated 26.3.2012 has categorically
directed the Department to fill the posts of Patwaris in
Tehsil Kabirwala, District Khanewal through the
 Writ Petition No.13958/2012 6

recruitment process prescribed in the relevant rules. The

expression ‘relevant rules’ is of great importance. Certainly
it cannot be given any other connotation except the Rules
holding the field i.e. Punjab Revenue Department (Revenue
Administration Posts) Rules, 2009 which prescribes
educational qualification as noted above. It is noteworthy
that petitioners have not questioned the vires of the Rules,
2009 through this petition.
9. I have gone through the case law cited by the
learned counsel for the petitioners. In this regard suffice to
say that the facts of the cited cases are altogether distinct
and distinguishable from the facts of the instant case. The
dictums laid down in the cited cases have no relevance to
the facts of the instant case and of no avail to the petitioners
after enforcement of the Punjab Revenue Department
(Revenue Administration Posts) Rules, 2009 as well as
repealing of the Punjab Revenue Department (Revenue
Administration Posts) Rules, 1990.
10. In view of the above, I do not find any factual or
legal infirmity in the advertisement dated 17.8.2012 issued
by the District Collector/Chairman Recruitment Committee,
District Khanewal/respondent No.4. Both the writ petitions,
therefore, having no merit are dismissed.

(ABDUS SATTAR ASGHAR)

JUDGE

Approved for reporting.

JUDGE
‘Sarwar’