2003 PLP 1957 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD ANWAR TIPPU‑‑‑ Petitioner Versus G. M., PAKISTAN RAILWAYS and others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 2003 PLP 1957 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Tanvir Ahmed Khan and Khalil‑ur‑Rehman Ramday, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ANWAR TIPPU‑‑‑ Petitioner Versus G. M., PAKISTAN RAILWAYS and others‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Federal Government Lands and Buildings (Recovery of Possession) Ordinance (LIV of 1965)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2003 PLP 1957 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Federal Government Lands and Buildings (Recovery of Possession) Ordinance (LIV of 1965)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2003 PLP 1957 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Tanvir Ahmed Khan and Khalil‑ur‑Rehman Ramday, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2003 PLP 1957 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD ANWAR TIPPU‑‑‑ Petitioner Versus G. M., PAKISTAN RAILWAYS and others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Shahid Saeed, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 24th February, 2003.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order dated 14‑6‑2002 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, passed in Writ Petition No. 10286 of 2002)). ‑‑‑‑Ss.9 & 10‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑ Government accommodation, vacation of‑‑‑Supreme Court disposed of appeal with direction that petitioner would vacate premises within four months and pay for its use during such period normal tariff charges instead of commercial rates inclusive of utility bills, but in case of his failure to vacate premises within such period, Department would get premises vacated through police force and charge commercial rates. Petitioner in person.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑‑Ss.9 & 10‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑ Government accommodation, vacation of‑‑‑Supreme Court disposed of appeal with direction that petitioner would vacate premises within four months and pay for its use during such period normal tariff charges instead of commercial rates inclusive of utility bills, but in case of his failure to vacate premises within such period, Department would get premises vacated through police force and charge commercial rates. Petitioner in person. Shahid Saeed, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents. Date of hearing: 24th February, 2003. TANVIR AHMED KHAN, J.‑‑‑After arguing the case for some time the petitioner has made a prayer that he would vacate the disputed premises provided some time is given for the same and the utility bills be charged at normal rates.
2. We have taken into consideration all the aspects of the case. Accordingly we grant. four months time to the petitioner to vacate the premises and the department would charge normal rates qua the utility bills. In view of what has been stated above this petition is converted into appeal and is disposed of with the direction that the petitioner shall hand over vacant possession of the premises to the respondent Pakistan Railway on or before 24‑6‑2003 and would pay the normal tariff charges instead of commercial rates for the use of the premises inclusive of utility bills.
3. If the aforesaid premises is not vacated within the stipulated period i.e. on or before 24‑6‑2003, in that eventuality the Railway Authorities would be well within their rights to get the premises vacated through police force, if necessary, without any notice to the petitioner and would also be entitled to charge the commercial rates. The appeal stands disposed of in the terms stated above with no order as to costs. S.A.K./M‑886/S Order accordingly.