2015 PLP 439 (CLC)
AMEER NAWAZ KHAN NIAZI and another — Appellants Versus MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE, PUNJAB, LAHORE and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2015 PLP 439 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | AMEER NAWAZ KHAN NIAZI and another — Appellants Versus MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE, PUNJAB, LAHORE and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Show-cause notice |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2015 PLP 439 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Show-cause notice as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2015 PLP 439 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2015 PLP 439 (CLC) (AMEER NAWAZ KHAN NIAZI and another — Appellants Versus MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE, PUNJAB, LAHORE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Safdar Khan Magsi, vice Malik Abdus Sattar Chughtai for Petitioner (in W.P. No.22756 of 2014).
- Syed Iqbal Hussain Shah Gillani for Petitioner (in W.P. No.26350 of 2014).
- Ch. Haroon-ur-Rashid Gujjar for Petitioner (in Writ Petitions Nos.29599 of 2014 and 29835 of 2014).
- Muhammad Akbar Hayat Awan and Muhammad Irshad Ch. for Petitioner (in W.P. No.28693 of 2014).
Headnotes / Summary
Issuance of show-cause notice
Notice cannot be vague and unspecific, but must clearly lay out the accusation levelled against the person concerned, notice was not sustainable in law as the same did not provide an opportunity for the person to defend themselves.
Judgment & Decree
This order will decide the instant appeal, as well as, connected writ petitions mentioned in Schedule "A" as all these cases raise common questions of law and facts.
2. Grievance of the appellants/petitioners is that they have been served with impugned Notice dated August, 2014 which does not carry any specific reference to the land in possession of the appellants/ petitioners. The impugned Notices are vague and unsigned and appear to have been issued in a mechanical manner to the appellants and the petitioners.
3. It is settled law that notices cannot be vague and unspecific but must clearly layout the accusation levelled against the person concerned so that he can respond to the same. Reliance is placed on Noor Ahmed v. Province of East Pakistan and others (PLD 1962 Dacca 533), Noor Ahmed v. Province of East Pakistan and others (PLD 1964 Dacca 546), Lakhu Sarkar v. Government of East Pakistan and others (PLD 1964 Dacca 217), Assistant Collector Customs and others v. Messrs Khyber Electric Lamps and 3 others (2001 SCMR 838).
4. In the light of the above, the impugned notice being vague and unspecific is not sustainable in law as it does not provide an opportunity to the appellants and the petitioners to defend themselves. Therefore, the impugned notices are set aside. It is, however, clarified that respondent, department is free to issue fresh Show-Cause Notice to the appellants/petitioners strictly in accordance with law after complying with requirements of valid Show-Cause Notice.
5. Impugned order dated 12-9-2014 passed by the learned Single Judge is modified accordingly.