2003 PLP 1939 (MLD)
ZAFAR PERVEZ SHEIKH‑‑‑Petitioner Versus LAHORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY through Director General, Lahore and 3 others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 2003 PLP 1939 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Mian Saqib Nisar, J |
| Parties | ZAFAR PERVEZ SHEIKH‑‑‑Petitioner Versus LAHORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY through Director General, Lahore and 3 others‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2003 PLP 1939 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2003 PLP 1939 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Mian Saqib Nisar, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2003 PLP 1939 (MLD) (ZAFAR PERVEZ SHEIKH‑‑‑Petitioner Versus LAHORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY through Director General, Lahore and 3 others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- M.A. Zafar for Petitioner.
- Ch. Muhammad Rashid Ahmad for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑-‑Art.199‑‑‑Constitutional petition‑‑‑Grievance of the petitioner was that order. canceling the allotment of a plot was passed by the Authorities without providing him an opportunity of hearing despite the fact that petitioner's allotment had been acknowledged‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Letter of cancellation of petitioner's allotment was declared to be without jurisdiction and lawful authority‑‑‑High Court ordered the Authorities to issue a show‑cause notice to the petitioner and decide the matter afresh.
Judgment & Decree
Writ Petition No. 15577 of 2001, decided on 17th February, 2003. ‑‑-‑Art.199‑‑‑Constitutional petition‑‑‑Grievance of the petitioner was that order. canceling the allotment of a plot was passed by the Authorities without providing him an opportunity of hearing despite the fact that petitioner's allotment had been acknowledged‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Letter of cancellation of petitioner's allotment was declared to be without jurisdiction and lawful authority‑‑‑High Court ordered the Authorities to issue a show‑cause notice to the petitioner and decide the matter afresh. M.A. Zafar for Petitioner. Ch. Muhammad Rashid Ahmad for Respondents. The main grievance of the petitioner is that the letter dated 4‑10‑2000, Annexure 'I', whereby exemption of his plot has been cancelled/withdrawn, was passed without providing an opportunity of hearing to him, despite the fact that in the earlier correspondence between the parties, this allotment had been acknowledged, and in pursuance thereof the petitioner had also deposited certain amount with the respondent LDA. Moreover, the entitlement of the petitioner has been acknowledged not only in the correspondence attached with this writ petition, but also in the comments filed by the LDA, on the question, whether the petitioner is entitled to this plot or some other plot.
2. Learned counsel for the respondent LDA, when confronted, has not been able to establish from the record, if the opportunity of hearing had been given to the petitioner before the letter Annexure 'I' , was issued. Resultantly, such letter is declared to be without jurisdiction and without lawful authority. The respondent‑Department is directed to issue the petitioner a proper show‑cause notice, and shall decide the matter afresh, after hearing the petitioner, keeping into account all the evidence brought before it. Disposed of. H.B.T./Z‑162/L Order accordingly.