ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that charagah land, which is an open pasture, field, or meadow used for cattle grazing, is different from state land and can only be leased under certain restrictions with the Board of Revenue’s (BoR) approval.
In a ruling, Justice Ayesha A. Malik noted that grazing land is always regarded as a shared resource for the benefit of a village and that, if it is leased out, it must be for a public purpose, and only for a predetermined amount of time with the BoR’s approval.
Justice Malik, who presided over a three-judge Supreme Court bench that had heard petitions against the May 29, 2024, Lahore High Court order that allowed Maratab Ali’s (respondent) writ petition and overturned the orders of the three revenue forums against the respondent, noted that the grazing land cannot be given to anyone under the Lambardari grant because the character of such land cannot be altered.
The Supreme Court’s ruling recounted how the petitioners had contested Maratab Ali’s pasture award based on a 2006 announcement from the Punjab government. Muhammad Yousaf, the petitioner, had contested the respondent’s grazing land grant under the Lambardari grant, arguing that it was unlawful.
Following his appointment as lambardar of Chak No. 23, Tehsil Malikwal in the Mandi Bahauddin district in 2001, Maratab Ali was granted 140 kanals and 18 marlas of grazing land under the terms of the Lambardari grant by mutation No. 1173, February 24, 2009.
According to Justice Malik, a charagah property was traditionally seen as communal land set aside for grazing purposes, serving the village’s needs rather than those of any one person. She went on to say that it was traditionally regarded as non-cultivable and specifically utilized for a group purpose as part of the village’s communal rights.
Although this strip of land is always kept up by the community and cannot be given, sold, or traded, it may be utilized for public projects like expanding playgrounds and schools, creating pits for the temporary storage of manure for village tanks, and planting trees.
According to Justice Malik, a charagah is not state land, hence the BoR must approve its use. The Charagah Policy and the 2001 notification make clear that the Charagah territory has particularly unique characteristics.
According to the ruling, lambardars chosen as village headmen were given land under certain programs, such as the Temporary Cultivation Scheme or the Pedigree Livestock Breeding Scheme.
Lambardars might lease the land during this period, and even state land could not be granted proprietary rights, according to the 2006 notification. The Lambardari gift was intended to provide him a share in the village’s revenue collection.
The lambardari award is still given to lambardars as a kind of compensation, despite the fact that a lot has changed over time, it stated.
The ruling clarified that on July 10, 2022, the BoR issued a particular recommendation that a charagah land could not be distributed to any individual under the lambardari grant. The rationale behind this recommendation and the careful protection of the charagah was that the land’s nature could not be altered.
Even this guidance was disregarded in the contested ruling, which led to the upholding of the respondent’s award. “We find that the revenue officers correctly revoked the respondent’s lambardari grant of Charagah land and ordered its resumption in favor of the State,” the ruling stated.
