2000 PLP 1464 (CLC)
PUNJAB, LAHORE‑‑‑Petitioner Versus DISTRICT JUDGE, SAHIWAL, and another‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 2000 PLP 1464 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Nasim Sikandar, J |
| Parties | PUNJAB, LAHORE‑‑‑Petitioner Versus DISTRICT JUDGE, SAHIWAL, and another‑‑‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2000 PLP 1464 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2000 PLP 1464 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Nasim Sikandar, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2000 PLP 1464 (CLC) (PUNJAB, LAHORE‑‑‑Petitioner Versus DISTRICT JUDGE, SAHIWAL, and another‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Mirza Manzoor Ahmad for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondent No. 1. Ch. Imdad Ali Khan for Respondent No.2.
- Date of hearing: 6th March, 2000.
Headnotes / Summary
(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑Art. 199‑‑‑Constitutional petition‑‑‑Maintainability‑‑‑Assailing the order of Civil Court in Constitutional petition‑‑‑Scope‑‑‑No such petition was maintainable‑ unless order of Civil Court was wholly void or coram non judice. Muhammad Zahoor and another v. Lal Muhammad and 2 others 1988 SCMR 322; Abdul Rehman Bajwa v. Sultan and 9 others PLD 1981 SC 522 and Noor Muhammad v. Sarwar Khan and 2 others PLD 1985 SC 131 ref. (b) Auqaf (Federal Control) Act (LVI of 1976)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑Ss. 7 & 11‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199‑‑‑Constitutional petition‑‑‑Maintainability‑‑‑Order of District Judge declaring the disputed property as a "Waqf" property‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Authorities withdrew the notification and District Judge decided the matter in accordance with the statement of the Authorities during the pendency of proceedings against notification of taking charge of the disputed property‑‑‑Constitutional petition was filed with a delay of 7 years, neither there was any reason for such delay nor any justification for failure to file an appeal against the order of District Judge‑‑‑Situation emerging from the record of the case did not justify exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction vested in High Court‑‑‑Petition was dismissed in circumstances. The Murree Brewery Co. Ltd. v. Pakistan through the Secretary to Government of Pakistan and 2 others PLD 1972 SC 279; Utility Stores corporation of Pakistan Limited v. Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal and others PLD 1987. SC 447: Zafar‑ul‑Ahsan v. The Republic of Pakistan through Cabinet Secretary, Government of Pakistan PLD 1960 SC 113; The Chief Settlement Commissioner, Lahore v. Raja Muhammad Fazil Khan and others PLD 1975 SC 331; Muhammad Hussain Munir and others v. Sikandar and others PLD 1974 SC 139; Hira Lal Patni v. Sri Kali Nath AIR 1962 SC 199; Rampratab Brijmohandas and others v. Govrishankar Kashiram AIR 1924 Bom. 109; Cuttack Municipality v. Shyamsundar Behera AIR 1977 Orissa 137; Khan Bahadur v. Sher Ahmed and 3 others PLD 1993 Pesh. 241; Muhammad Sharif and another v. Muhammad Afzal Sohail and others PLD 1981 SC 246; Messrs Tank Steel and Re‑rolling Mills (Pvt) Ltd., Dera Ismail Khan and others v. Federation of Pakistan and others PLD 1996 SC 77; Chief Administrator of Auqaf v. Muhammad Ramzan and others PLD 1991 SC 102; Shaikh Gulzar Ali & Co. Ltd. and others v. Special Judge, Special Court of Banking and another 1991 SCMR 590 and Muhammad Sharif v. Chief Administrator of Auqaf, Punjab, Lahore 1971 SCMR 713 ref.