1987 PLP 187 (CLC)

P L D 1962 Quetta 28 and P L D 1971 Kar. 182 ref. Muhammad Zafar for Petitioner. Respondent No.l in person. Nemo for other Respondents. Date of hearing: 11th April, 1973. GHULAM RASUL SHAIKH, J.‑‑This is a petition to challenge the orders passed by the Deputy Commissioner and confirmed by the Commissioner as well as the Member, Board of Revenue. The respondent No.l filed a suit for possession of land basing his claim on the right of presumption in the Court of Assistant Commissioner, Quetta, working as Deputy Commissioner. The petitioner filed written statement repudiating the claim. The respondents simultaneously made an application for the grant of interim injunction and it was granted by the Deputy Commissioner. Aggrieved by this the petitioner filed an appeal before the Commissioner but it was dismissed. The revision filed against that order was also dismissed by the Member, Board of Revenue. Consequently the present petition has been filed. It was urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner that‑the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner granting injunction was without jurisdiction as no such power vested in him. We entirely agree with this contention. The present case is regulated by the Civil Procedure (Special Provisions) West Pakistan Ordinance, 1968. In this connection some of the provisions of the Ordinance may be referred to S. 3(2) lays down that except as otherwise provided in this Ordinance, the provisions of the Evidence Act and the Civil Procedure Code shall not apply to any proceedings under the Ordinance. Section 4 deals with the Constitution and reference of the dispute to a tribunal. It lays down that if any party to a dispute which is required to be adjudged in accordance with the provisions of the Ordinance makes an application A in writing to the Deputy Commissioner for adjudication or Settlement of such dispute the Deputy Commissioner shall constitute a tribunal in accordance with S. 5 by order in writing, referring the dispute to the Tribunal for a finding on such matters or issues as may be specified in the order. Section 9 confers certain powers of Civil Court upon the Tribunal. It says that for the purpose of performance of its function under this Ordinance, the Tribunal shall have the same powers as are vested in a Civil Court trying a suit under the Code of Civil Procedure in respect of enforcing the attendance of any witness or production of any document or other thing. From these provisions of law it is plain enough that no power for the grant of any injunction vests in the Deputy Commissioner. This position was also conceded by the learned counsel for the respondent but he pleaded that there was inherent power to grant temporary injunction and he placed reliance upon two authorities reported in PLD 1962 Quetta 28 and P L D 1971 Kar. 182, but these authorities are clearly distinguishable and are not applicable to the present case. It B may be pointed out that the Deputy Commissioner is a mere referring authority and he has no power to issue an injunction or take any other step. He cannot assume jurisdiction which is not vested in him. This may be available to the tribunal but at this stage we are not going to decide that question as neither it arises nor it has been argued before us. In the result the orders passed by the various authorities are without jurisdiction and of no legal effect. A . A . Petition accepted.