1991 PLP 1898 (SCMR)
NISAR HUSSAIN SHAH — Petitioner Versus THE EXTRA ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1991 PLP 1898 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Saad Saood Jan and S. Usman Ali Shah, JJ |
| Parties | NISAR HUSSAIN SHAH — Petitioner Versus THE EXTRA ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973). |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1991 PLP 1898 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973). as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1991 PLP 1898 (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 1898 (SCMR) (NISAR HUSSAIN SHAH — Petitioner Versus THE EXTRA ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sharif Hussain Bukhari, Advocate Supreme Court and Mahmood A. Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Ghulam Mahmood Qureshi, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 18th September, 1989.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgment dated 17-12-85 of the Lahore High Court in W.P.No.652-R of 1977.
Art. 185(3)
Allotment of land, cancellation of
Allotment of land in dispute made in favour of respondent allottee was challenged by petitioner, contending that person to whom allotment was initially made had died and respondent in case who was simply the namesake of original allottee was a different person-- Evidence on record did not support contention of petitioner while on the other hand it was proved that original allottee/respondent was alive and was representing as respondent--Petition for leave to appeal being without any merit was dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.
Mst. Fateh Begum was a refugee from the State of Jammu and Khasmir. She was allotted land in village Dhala by way of maintenance. On the representation of the petitioner that Mst. Fateh Begum had died, the allotment held by her was given to him. Mst. Fateh Begum sent a petition to the Chief Minister with the allegations that she had been fraudulently deprived of her allotment on account of the misrepresentation made by the petitioner. On this petition a regular inquiry was held. The inquiry officer found: On the basis of the inquiry report the allotment made in favour of the petitioner was cancelled and the land was given back to Mst. Fateh Begum. The petitioner filed a writ petition in the High Court. It was dismissed. He now seeks leave to appeal from this Court.
2. The case of the petitioner is that Mst. Fateh Begum to whom the allotment was initially made, was a different person from Mst: Fateh Begum who had moved the petition before the Chief Minister. The evidence on record does not support this contention. It is to be noticed that the members of the family of Mst. Fateh Begum in whose favour the allotment was made are mentioned in the record of the Rehabilitation Authorities. It is not the case of the petitioner that these members did not belong to the family of that Mst. Fateh Begum who had moved the petition before the Chief Minister. This petition is without any merit and is hereby dismissed. H.B.T./N-225/S Petition dismissed.