2004 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

NAZIM HUSSAIN SIDDIQUI, J.

Petitioner, Mst. Tasneem Akhtar, has impugned the judgment, dated 7-10-2003 delivered by a learned Division Bench, Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench in Intra Court Appeal No.6 of 2003, whereby said Intra Court Appeal was partly allowed and order of learned Single Judge in Chamber was set aside with the following observations:-- "(13) As we have found that the appellant is a trespasser, therefore, he is directed to hand over the possession of Quarter No.211-E/Sector G-6-4, Islamabad to the Estate Office on or before 31-12-2003. Taking a lenient view, the appellant who is trespasser and has school going children, we are providing him breathing space to make alternate arrangement. We partly allow the I.C.A. and set aside-the order of the learned Single Judge in Chamber and hold that respondent No.3 was not entitled to allotment and allotment letter issued in her favour in respect of order, dated 7-8-2002 was without jurisdiction and of no legal effect. The allotment of quarter .concerned would be made strictly in accordance with the Pakistan Allocation Rules, 1993 keeping in view the seniority list of the candidates for allotment. "

2. We heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

3. It transpires from the record that no formal allotment order of quarter in question was issued in favour of respondent No.3, Muhammad Javed and he had illegally occupied it, when it was lying vacant. He, in fact, is a trespasser and in that capacity is not entitled to any equitable relief. As regards petitioner, she is serving as TGT in BPS-16 in Federal Government Junior Model School, G-6/2, Islamabad. She applied for allotment of a quarter and on the seniority list her number was

610. Her husband is also a Government employee and is serving as an Assistant in the Estate Office and has been allotted House No.3 Block No.73-D, St No.36, F-6/1, Islamabad and she is residing with him. She applied for allotment of the quarter in question on out of turn basis.

4. It is true that, as per rules, allotment could be made out of turn but the conditions required for such allotment were-not fulfilled by her. So could be done in the case of hardship, which-is not her case. It being so, the order of authority to allot her quarter was against the provisions of Pakistan Allocation Rules, 1993. Under the circumstances, neither the petitioner nor the respondent No.3 were entitled to allotment of the quarter in question. The direction of High Court, to allot it as per the seniority list for allotment, is in terms of the rules referred to earlier anti not open to any exception.

5. In consequence, leave to appeal is refused and the petition is dismissed. M.H./T-2/S Petition dismissed.