2001 PLP 643 (CLC)
REHABILITATION WING‑‑‑Petitioner Versus MOMNA KHATOON and 14 others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 2001 PLP 643 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Ghulam Mahmood Qureshi, J |
| Parties | REHABILITATION WING‑‑‑Petitioner Versus MOMNA KHATOON and 14 others‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2001 PLP 643 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2001 PLP 643 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Ghulam Mahmood Qureshi, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2001 PLP 643 (CLC) (REHABILITATION WING‑‑‑Petitioner Versus MOMNA KHATOON and 14 others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Hanif Rana for Petitioner.
- Ch. Amir Hussain and Shahzad Shaukat for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑Art. 199‑‑‑Constitutional petition‑‑‑Maintainability‑‑‑High Court on a Constitutional petition, filed earlier, stayed the proceedings and petitioner (Provincial Government) aggrieved by such order of the High Court filed another Constitutional petition which was supported by affidavit of Deputy Settlement Commissioner‑‑‑Maintainability of petition‑‑‑If Deputy Settlement Commissioner was aggrieved by the order passed by High Court with regard to stay of proceedings, remedy provided under law was to file an application for vacation of stay order‑‑‑Even otherwise Deputy Commissioner was the Competent Authority to act on behalf of the Province and the Deputy Settlement Commissioner/Notified Officer in his capacity could not be said to be an aggrieved person in relation to judicial order regarding affairs of Provincial Government‑‑‑Constitutional petition filed without any valid authority, therefore, was not maintainable‑‑‑Deputy Settlement Commissioner could not bind and use name of the Province of Punjab and institute litigation on its behalf. Manthar and another v. Province of Sindh through Deputy commissioner, Sangnar and 4 others 1996 MLD 1510 ref.
Judgment & Decree
Manthar and another v. Province of Sindh through Deputy commissioner, Sangnar and 4 others 1996 MLD 1510 ref. Muhammad Hanif Rana for Petitioner. Ch. Amir Hussain and Shahzad Shaukat for Respondents. This writ petition has been filed by Province of Punjab (Settlement and Rehabilitation Wing 11‑Egerton Road, Lahore) which is supported by an‑~ affidavit of Muhammad Azim, Deputy Settlement Commissioner, In paia. 20 of the writ petition it is mentioned as under:‑‑ "The petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by this Honourable Court in Writ Petition No.55/R of 1983 which has stopped further proceedings."
2. On 8‑2‑1996, objection was raised about the maintainability of this Constitutional petition which was to the effect "that it is not shown as to under whose authority this petition has been filed. The original counsel Ch. Muhammad Nazir Ahmad, Advocate, derives his authority from Wakalatnama allegedly executed by one Muhammad Azam, Deputy Settlement Commissioner.
3. When confronted with the abovesaid objection learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contended that the Deputy Settlement Commissioner was competent to agitate this matter before this Court when the allotment obtained was based on fraud and misrepresentation, I am afraid the contention of the learned counsel has any force for the simple reason that if the Deputy Settlement Commissioner was aggrieved by the order passed by this Court in regard to stay, of proceedings through an order passed in Writ Petition No.55/R of 1983 then the remedy provided under law was to file an application for vacation of stay order. Deputy Commissioner was the 4 competent Authority to act on behalf of Province of Punjab and the Deputy Settlement Commissioner/Notified Officer in his official capacity or otherwise cannot be said to be an aggrieved person in relation to a judicial order regarding affairs of Government. The present petition has been filed without any valid authority as no such authority is available on the file. This being so, this petition is not maintainable. If any authority is needed reference may be made to Manthar and another v. Province of Sindh through Deputy Commissioner, Sanghar and 4 others 1996 MLD 1510. Deputy Settlement Commissioner cannot bind and use the name of Province of Punjab and institute litigation on its behalf.
4. In the light of what has been discussed above, this petition has no merit and the same is dismissed, with costs. H.B T./P‑19/L Petition dismissed.