1991 PLP 1462 (CLC)
KAKA and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD SHARIF and others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1991 PLP 1462 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Manzoor Hussain Sial, J |
| Parties | KAKA and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD SHARIF 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 1462 (CLC)?
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 1462 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Manzoor Hussain Sial, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1991 PLP 1462 (CLC) (KAKA and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD SHARIF and others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ras Tariq Ch. for Petitioners.
- Muhammad Nawaz Sulehria for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 3rd April, 1991.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S. 31‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199‑‑‑Settlement Commissioner in his order which was challenged by Constitutional petition, set aside order passed by Additional Settlement Commissioner, in appeal against order of Deputy Settlement Commissioner on ground of lack of jurisdiction‑‑‑Respondents also pointed out that they also were condemned unheard by Additional Settlement Commissioner as he passed order without notice to them ‑‑‑He, assuming that Additional Settlement Commissioner had no jurisdiction to pass order in appeal, Settlement Commissioner was required to remand case to him for disposal on merits after setting aside that order‑‑‑High Court accepted petition, set aside orders passed both by Settlement Commissioner and Additional Settlement Commissioner being not sustainable under law and remanded case to Notified officer to decide the same afresh in accordance with law after providing opportunity of hearing to parties.
Judgment & Decree
This writ petition is directed against order dated 20‑5‑1974 of the Settlement Commissioner (L), Sialkot whereby he set aside order dated 12‑4‑1971 of the ADC (G)/Additional Settlement Commissioner (L) Sialkot passed in appeal against order dated 20‑6‑1969 of the Deputy Settlement Commissioner (L), Narowal.
2. The main ground which weighed with the Settlement Commissioner in recalling the impugned order was that the Additional Settlement Commissioner who took cognizance of the appeal was not assigned the case under section 31 of the Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act, 1958.
3. Learned counsel for petitioners contended that assuming that the Additional Settlement Commissioner had no jurisdiction to pass the impugned order the Settlement Commissioner was required to remand the case to him for disposal on merits after setting aside the impugned order. There is substance in this submission.
4. Learned counsel for contesting respondents also does not seriously controvert this submission. At this stage learned counsel for respondents has pointed out that it is an admitted fact that the Additional Settlement Commissioner had passed order dated 12‑4‑1971 without notice to the respondents and thus they were condemned unheard. Learned counsel for petitioners was unable to controvert this contention raised by his adversary. In this view of the matter the order dated 12‑4‑1971 is also not sustainable under the law.
5. In the result this writ petition is allowed and the order dated 20‑5‑1974 passed by the Settlement Commissioner and order dated 12‑4‑1971 passed by the Additional Settlement Commissioner (L), Sialkot are declared to be of no legal consequence.
6. Resultantly, the appeal filed by the present petitioners against order dated 20‑6‑1969 of the Deputy Settlement Commissioner (L), Narowal will be deemed to be pending and shall be disposed of, in accordance with law, by the Notified Officer, after providing opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned.
7. There shall be no order as to costs. H.B.T./K‑324/L Petition allowed.