1995 PLP 1076 (MLD)

‑‑‑Art. 199‑‑‑Demolition of alleged encroachments‑‑‑Authority issuing notice to petitioners for demolition of construction raised by them being an encroachment on highway‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Perusal of demarcation report showed that construction in question had been held to be encroachment in pursuance of measurements conducted by officials wherein petitioners had not been associated nor were they given opportunity of being heard before issuance of order of demolition to them‑‑‑Matter was remitted by High Court to Authorities for decision of question of encroachment and demolition thereof, afresh after associating petitioners with the measurements and giving them opportunity of being heard and fully examining their defence, if any, within specified period: ‑‑[Natural justice, principles of]. Ch. Muhammad Ashraf Azeem for Petitioner. Syed Niaz Ali Shah, Addl. A. G., Punjab for Respondents. This order will dispose of three connected Writ Petitions Nos.11028/94,11029/94 and W.P. 9915/94 as they involve identical factual and legal question. The respondents have issued notices to the petitioners in all the three cases for demolition of the construction raised by them as being encroachment over the G.T. Road and in pursuance of those notices the respondent intended to demolish the construction raised by the petitioners.

2. Through these Constitutional petitions legality and vires of the aforementioned notices and intended act of the respondent have been challenged before this Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the issue of alleged encroachment has not been determined in presence of the petitioners and that they have neither been associated with the proceedings of alleged measurements conducted by the respondents Nos.2 and 3 nor have been given an opportunity of being heard.

3. Learned Addl. A. G., Punjab, under instructions of respondents, as well as after perusal of the demarcation report a photocopy whereof has been placed on record of this case states that the construction in question has been held to be encroachments, in pursuance of the measurements conducted by the respondents Nos.2 and 3, with which the petitioners had not been associated, and further that the petitioners are not proved to have been heard prior to passing the order of the demolition of the disputed construction. Learned counsel for the parties hence agree and pray that all the three writ petitions may be accepted and the matter may be remitted to the respondents for final decision of the question of encroachment and demolition thereof afresh after associating the petitioners with the measurements and A.A./F‑179/L Case remitted.