P L D 2007 Lahore 529 (PLP)
Ch. WARIS ALI and others — Petitioners Versus E.D.O.(R) and others — Respondent
| Citation | P L D 2007 Lahore 529 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | Ch. WARIS ALI and others — Petitioners Versus E.D.O.(R) and others — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Evacuee Property and Displaced Persons Laws (Repeal) Act (XIV of 1975) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 2007 Lahore 529 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Evacuee Property and Displaced Persons Laws (Repeal) Act (XIV of 1975) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 2007 Lahore 529 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 2007 Lahore 529 (PLP) (Ch. WARIS ALI and others — Petitioners Versus E.D.O.(R) and others — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- ----S.2---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199---Constitutional petition---Cancellation of allotment of evacuee property---Property purchased by petitioners under registered sale-deed and duly mutated in the revenue record, had been ex-propriated on the ground that it belonged to the Forest Department under the law declared by Supreme. Court in its judgment reported as 1991 SCMR 1426 which had provided that allotment of evacuee property in the possession of the Forest Department made by orders of the Settlement Authorities passed on or before 27-2-1965 had been protected and allotments made or alleged to have been made after said date had been declared illegal---Counsel for petitioners had alleged that impugned order was also passed without hearing the petitioners---Impugned order was alleged to be mechanical by failing to advert to the crucial criterion of date of allotment, whereby fate of title in the disputed land was to be determined---Petitioners were granted an opportunity to appear and establish before authorities through documentary material that date of allotment of disputed land was prior in time to the target date given in the judgment of Supreme Court, if that was accomplished the underlying premise of impugned order would disappear and authorities would have to pass a fresh order in accordance with law in the proceedings---Petitioners were given six weeks time to present such material before authorities---If petitioners failed to produce documentary material proving a qualifying data of allotment of disputed land by the Settlement Authorities within the time allowed, impugned order would stand.
- Ch. Muhammad Nawaz Sulehria for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
S.2
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199
Constitutional petition
Cancellation of allotment of evacuee property
Property purchased by petitioners under registered sale-deed and duly mutated in the revenue record, had been ex-propriated on the ground that it belonged to the Forest Department under the law declared by Supreme. Court in its judgment reported as 1991 SCMR 1426 which had provided that allotment of evacuee property in the possession of the Forest Department made by orders of the Settlement Authorities passed on or before 27-2-1965 had been protected and allotments made or alleged to have been made after said date had been declared illegal
Counsel for petitioners had alleged that impugned order was also passed without hearing the petitioners
Impugned order was alleged to be mechanical by failing to advert to the crucial criterion of date of allotment, whereby fate of title in the disputed land was to be determined
Petitioners were granted an opportunity to appear and establish before authorities through documentary material that date of allotment of disputed land was prior in time to the target date given in the judgment of Supreme Court, if that was accomplished the underlying premise of impugned order would disappear and authorities would have to pass a fresh order in accordance with law in the proceedings
Petitioners were given six weeks time to present such material before authorities
If petitioners failed to produce documentary material proving a qualifying data of allotment of disputed land by the Settlement Authorities within the time allowed, impugned order would stand.
Judgment & Decree
UMAR ATA BANDIAL, J.
This petition is filed against the impugned order dated 7-12-2005 passed by the EDO(R) respondent No.1 whereby the petitioners immovable property purchased under registered sale-deed dated 2-9-1990 and duly mutated in the revenue record on 12-9-1990 has been ex-propriated on the ground that it belongs to the Forest Department under the law declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its judgment reported in Province of Punjab v. Muhammad Mehmood Shah 1991 SCMR 1426. He has read from the said judgment wherein allotment of evacuee property in the possession of the Forest Department that were made by orders of the settlement authority passed oh or before 27-2-1965 have been protected whereas allotments made or alleged to have been made after the said date have been declared illegal and the land in question to vest in the Forest Department. Learned counsel has thereafter read from the impugned order which fails to consider the date of the allotment order made in favour of the petitioner's predecessor in interest of the disputed property. He submits that the impugned order was also passed without hearing the petitioner. It is alleged to be mechanical by failing to advert the crucial criterion of date of allotment whereby the fate of title iii the disputed land is to be determined.
2. Learned A.A.-G. submits that the impugned order was passed after the perusal of the record with the assistance of the staff of the Revenue Department and the Forest Department who were in attendance. However, he is not in a position to controvert or explain the omission by the impugned order to consider and decide the matter with reference to the date of allotment of disputed land in favour of the petitioners' predecessor in interest which is the pivotal criterion under the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The impugned order, accordingly deprives the petitioner of valuable immovable property by a sweeping statement that is devoid of essential content. It cannot sustain.
3. The petitioners are accordingly granted an opportunity to appear and establish before the respondent No.1 through documentary material that the date of allotment of their predecessor-in-interest for the disputed land was made by the settlement authority prior in time to the target date given in the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. If this is accomplished the underlying premise of the impugned order shall disappear and the respondent No.1 shall pass afresh order in accordance with law in the proceedings. The petitioners are given six weeks from the date of this order to present such material, if any, before the respondent No.1. If the petitioners fail to produce documentary material proving a qualifying date of allotment of the disputed land by the settlement authorities within the time allowed, the impugned order shall stand. Disposed of. H.B.T./W-5/L Order accordingly.