ISLAMABAD: The Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) expressed concern over the inordinate delay in consolidating proceedings and its adverse implications for landowners’ property rights.
A two-member bench, headed by Chief Justice Amin-ud-Din, heard the petitions against the Lahore High Court order dated 26.09.2024. The bench noted that according to the record, the consolidation proceedings initiated in 1979 have remained embroiled in successive administrative and judicial proceedings for several decades.
The judgment said that such protracted litigation defeats the very object of consolidation, namely, rationalization of landholdings and certainty of proprietary rights. Prolonged administrative inaction not only perpetuates uncertainty regarding ownership and possession but also occasions financial hardship and multiplicity of litigation.
It said that the revenue authorities are under a statutory obligation to exercise their powers diligently, fairly and expeditiously, ensuring that valuable property rights, protected under Article 23 of the Constitution, are not rendered illusory through unwarranted delay.
The FCC issued guiding principles to the revenue authorities, particularly the Senior Member, Board of Revenue, Punjab:
(i) Consolidation proceedings shall be concluded expeditiously, within prescribed statutory timelines or, where none exist, within a reasonable period.
(ii) Unnecessary adjournments and administrative delays shall be avoided, and reasons for unavoidable delays shall be recorded.
(iii) Affected parties shall be afforded due opportunity of hearing, and all determinations shall be based on the relevant record and supported by cogent reasons.
(iv) Orders attaining lawful finality shall not be reopened except under express statutory authority, and binding judicial directions shall be implemented promptly.
(v) Repetitive remands and successive proceedings shall be discouraged to prevent multiplicity of litigation.
(vi) The Senior Member, Board of Revenue, Punjab, shall ensure effective supervision, timely disposal of longstanding matters and accountability for unjustified delays, strictly in accordance with law.
The judgment said that the High Court was required to adjudicate upon the matter on the basis of the documentary evidence and the orders passed by the revenue hierarchy, particularly when fresh consolidation was to be carried out in the light of the order of the Board of Revenue dated 20.03.1985, whereas the consolidation proceedings in the village had initially commenced in 1979.
It further said when the High Court had not decided the petition on merits and had not taken into consideration the fact that the earlier order of the High Court dated 26.09.2024 had already been implemented by the revenue hierarchy, referring the matter back to the revenue hierarchy for consolidation purposes was not sustainable under the law.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2026
Comments