1991 PLP 1821 (SCMR)
LAHORE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD ANWAR and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1991 PLP 1821 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Saad Saood Jan and S. Usman Ali Shah, JJ |
| Parties | LAHORE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD ANWAR and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act (XLVII of 1958) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1991 PLP 1821 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act (XLVII of 1958) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1991 PLP 1821 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Saad Saood Jan and S. Usman Ali Shah, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1991 PLP 1821 (SCMR) (LAHORE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD ANWAR and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- S. Abid Nawaz, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 17th September, 1989.
- S. Abid Nawaz, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Respondent No.1 in person with Ch. Muhammad Aslam Advocate‑on -Record.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgment dated 30-10-1985 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, in Writ Petition No.750-R of 1980).
Ss. 10 & 11
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)
Allotment of land, cancellation of
Land in dispute duly allotted to respondents by Settlement Authority, subsequently, on Mukhbari application, was cancelled on ground that same belonged to Municipal Corporation
High Court, however, accepting Constitutional petition filed by respondents, declared order of cancellation of allotment to be illegal
Petitioner corporation contended that property in question did not form part of compensation pool, could not be transferred by Settlement Authorities to anyone
Contention raised by petitioner needing examination, leave to appeal was granted. Respondent No.1 in person with Ch. Muhammad Aslam Advocate-on -Record.
Judgment & Decree
SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.‑‑‑A piece of land measuring about 9 Marlas and situate within the limits of the Municipal Corporation, Lahore was allotted by the Settlement authorities to the predecessor‑in‑interest of the respondents. After obtaining permission from the Municipal Corporation the respondents raised a structure thereon. Subsequently, on a Mukhbari application, the Settlement Commissioner cancelled the allotment on the ground that the land in question belonged to the Municipal Corporation. The respondents filed a writ petition in the High Court to call in question the legality Commissioner. A learned Single Judge accepted the writ petition and declared the order of cancellation to be illegal and without lawful authority. The Municipal Corporation seeks leave to appeal from the order of the learned Single Judge.
2. In support of this petition it is stated that as the property did not form part of the compensation pool, it could not be transferred by the Settlement authorities to anyone. The considerations that the Municipal Corporation had granted sanction to the respondents for raising a structure thereon and that it had not previously laid any claim to the land in dispute were not sufficient to set aside the order of the Settlement Commissioner.
3. The contention raised in support of this petition needs examination. Leave to appeal is granted. Security for costs in the sum of Rs.2,
000. The appeal may be made ready for hearing on the present record with permission to the parties to file additional documents, if any. H.B.T./L‑39/S Leave to appeal granted.