2003 PLP 245 (CLC)
DIN MUHAMMAD QURESHI‑‑‑Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF SINDH and others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 2003 PLP 245 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Sabihuddin Ahmed and S. Ali Aslam Jafri, JJ |
| Parties | DIN MUHAMMAD QURESHI‑‑‑Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF SINDH and others‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Sindh Buildings Control Ordinance (V of 1979)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2003 PLP 245 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Sindh Buildings Control Ordinance (V of 1979)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2003 PLP 245 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Sabihuddin Ahmed and S. Ali Aslam Jafri, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2003 PLP 245 (CLC) (DIN MUHAMMAD QURESHI‑‑‑Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF SINDH and others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Muzaffarul Haq for Petitioner.
- Hafiz‑ur‑Rehman Kardar for Respondent No.2.
- Shahid Jamiluddin Khan for Respondent No.3.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S. 6(2)‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199‑‑‑Constitutional petition‑‑‑Vacation of building for demolition‑‑‑Report submitted by Authority in Court showed that, ejectment notices had been issued to occupants of building before causing demolition, but occupants had not vacated the same‑‑‑In absence of occupancy certificate under S.6(2) of Sindh Buildings Control Ordinance, 1979, occupation of any part of building would be illegal‑‑‑No interim or final order protecting occupation of occupants of building had been passed by any Court‑‑‑Three months' time was given to Authority by the High Court to eject occupants of building, if necessary, by force and to perform its duties according to law.
Judgment & Decree
Constitutional Petition No.D‑446 of 1997, decided on 22nd August, 2001. ‑‑‑‑S. 6(2)‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199‑‑‑Constitutional petition‑‑‑Vacation of building for demolition‑‑‑Report submitted by Authority in Court showed that, ejectment notices had been issued to occupants of building before causing demolition, but occupants had not vacated the same‑‑‑In absence of occupancy certificate under S.6(2) of Sindh Buildings Control Ordinance, 1979, occupation of any part of building would be illegal‑‑‑No interim or final order protecting occupation of occupants of building had been passed by any Court‑‑‑Three months' time was given to Authority by the High Court to eject occupants of building, if necessary, by force and to perform its duties according to law. Muhammad Muzaffarul Haq for Petitioner. Hafiz‑ur‑Rehman Kardar for Respondent No.2. Shahid Jamiluddin Khan for Respondent No.3. SABIHUDDIN AHMED, J.‑‑‑ A report has been submitted in Court on behalf of respondent No.3 stating that ejectment notices had been issued to the occupants before causing demolition but the occupants have not yet vacated the building and necessary assistance to cause ejectment was not made available, We would reiterate that in the absence of occupancy certificate under section 6(2) of the Sindh Buildings Control Ordinance occupation of any part of the building would be illegal. Moreover, Mr. Muhammad Muzaffarul Haq has pointed out that an application on behalf of certain occupants to be impleaded as party to this petition was dismissed by the Court vide order, dated 16‑4‑1999 .wherein it was observed that they do not have any legal right to be joined but would be free to seek remedies before a proper forum, if so advised. According to learned counsel no interim or final order protecting their occupation has to the best of his knowledge, been passed by any Court. In the circumstances we would grant three months' time to the respondents to eject the occupants, if necessary by force, and perform their duties according to law. The respondent No. 1 is directed to provide necessary assistance to the respondent No.3. A compliance report may be submitted after the aforesaid period. H.B.T./D‑38/K Order accordingly.