1992 PLP 1444 (CLC)
YAOUB EUSUF MAYET‑‑‑Petitioner Versus PAKISTAN DEFENCE OFFICERS HOUSING AUTHORITY;,
| Citation | 1992 PLP 1444 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi. |
| Bench Members | Nasir Adam Zahid and Muhammad Aslam Arain, JJ |
| Parties | YAOUB EUSUF MAYET‑‑‑Petitioner Versus PAKISTAN DEFENCE OFFICERS HOUSING AUTHORITY;, |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1992 PLP 1444 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1992 PLP 1444 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi. bench comprising: Nasir Adam Zahid and Muhammad Aslam Arain, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1992 PLP 1444 (CLC) (YAOUB EUSUF MAYET‑‑‑Petitioner Versus PAKISTAN DEFENCE OFFICERS HOUSING AUTHORITY;,). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Abul lnam for Petitioner.
- Raja M. Irshad for Respondent
- Date of hearing: 19th November, 1990.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑Art. l9)‑‑‑Cancellation of allotment of plot‑‑‑Constitutional jurisdiction, exercise of‑‑‑Principles of natural justice, violation of‑‑‑Plot in question was duly purchased by petitioner/vendee from original allottee and the transfer was duly approved by Authority‑‑‑Allotment of plot subsequently was cancelled ,`, by Authority without first issuing show‑cause notice to petitioner and without hearing him‑‑‑If any adverse action was proposed to be taken by Authority against petitioner in respect of plot, a prior show‑cause notice giving full facts and grounds on which cancellation was needed, was to be given to petitioner and thereafter full opportunity was to be prodded to petitioner to place his case before the Authority and only after fulfilling such formalities, action should have been taken by Authority against petitioner‑‑‑Authority having itself conceded that cancellation order was being withdrawn as no such formalities had been fulfilled by Authority, order of canceling plot was set aside.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑‑Art. l9)‑‑‑Cancellation of allotment of plot‑‑‑Constitutional jurisdiction, exercise of‑‑‑Principles of natural justice, violation of‑‑‑Plot in question was duly purchased by petitioner/vendee from original allottee and the transfer was duly approved by Authority‑‑‑Allotment of plot subsequently was cancelled ,`, by Authority without first issuing show‑cause notice to petitioner and without hearing him‑‑‑If any adverse action was proposed to be taken by Authority against petitioner in respect of plot, a prior show‑cause notice giving full facts and grounds on which cancellation was needed, was to be given to petitioner and thereafter full opportunity was to be prodded to petitioner to place his case before the Authority and only after fulfilling such formalities, action should have been taken by Authority against petitioner‑‑‑Authority having itself conceded that cancellation order was being withdrawn as no such formalities had been fulfilled by Authority, order of canceling plot was set aside. Abul lnam for Petitioner. Raja M. Irshad for Respondent Date of hearing: 19th November, 1990. NASIR ASLAM ZAHID, J.‑‑‑In this petition, the petitioner has challenged the decision of the respondent authority cancelling the plot in question which had been purchased by the petitioner from the original allottee and which transfer had been approved by the Defence Authority. Mr. Raja M. Irshad, learned counsel for the respondent authority,' submits that the cancellation order is being withdrawn as, prior to taking adverse action against the petitioner in respect of the plot in question, no show‑cause notice and hearing had been granted to the petitioner.
2. Constitutional Petition No.D‑653 of 1985 is accordingly allowed and the order, cancelling the plot of the petitioner in question, is set aside on the ground that before taking such action no prior show‑cause notice and hearing was granted to the petitioner. 1f any action is proposed to be taken by the respondent authority against the petitioner in respect of the plot, a prior show cause notice giving full facts and the grounds, on which cancellation is intended, shall be given and thereafter full opportunity will be granted to the petitioner to place his case before the Defence Authority and only after fulfilling such formalities, action shall be taken by the respondent of authority.
3. The petitioner shall also be entitled to costs against the respondent. H.B.T./.Y‑59/K Petition allowed,