SCMR 1990

1990 PLP 381 (SCMR)

MUHAMMAD SHAFT and 3 others‑‑Petitioners Versus THE GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Collector

Jurisdiction / Court
High Court
Decided Date
Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No.968 of 1985, decided on 7th June, 1989.
Honorable Judges
Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Javid Iqbal, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1990 PLP 381 (SCMR)
Forum / Court High Court
Bench Members Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Javid Iqbal, JJ
Parties MUHAMMAD SHAFT and 3 others‑‑Petitioners Versus THE GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Collector
Primary Law Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP 381 (SCMR)?

This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1990 PLP 381 (SCMR)?

The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Javid Iqbal, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP 381 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD SHAFT and 3 others‑‑Petitioners Versus THE GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Collector). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑

Representation

  • Rana Mohammad Sarwar, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Inayat Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
  • Nemo for Respondent.
  • Date of hearing: 7th June, 1989.

Headnotes / Summary

(On appeal from the order, dated 9‑7‑1985 of the Lahore High Court in Regular Second Appeal No.51 of 1984/BWP.) ‑‑‑Art.185(3)‑‑‑Withdrawal of petition‑‑‑Petitioners seeking withdrawal of petition to avail the opportunity afforded by the Board of Revenue but apprehending at the same time that if relief was not given to them they might be left with no remedy‑‑‑Apprehension expressed by petitioners was unfounded‑‑‑Fresh refusal might give a fresh cause of action to them‑‑‑Petitioners, if aggrieved, might seek remedy in accordance with law‑‑‑Petition was allowed to be withdrawn.

Judgment & Decree

The Commissioner, Bahawalpur Division, Bahawalpur. Subject: Allotment of state land on Abadkari Conditions after imposition of ban by the former Bahawalpur Government Regularization thereof. Reference: Correspondence resting with your memo. No. Col/6‑34PII/346, dated 28th March, 1979. After giving due consideration to the points raised in your aforesaid memorandum the Board of Revenue, Punjab, has, in consultation with solicitor to Government, Punjab, made following clarification:‑‑ Obviously, those persons who have withdrawn their civil suits and are ready to fulfil all requirements, for the purchase of land allotted to them as Abadkars, they are entitled to purchase the land and, therefore, approved price of the land may be accepted from them. But those persons whose cases are pending in various Courts cannot be forced to pay the price and, therefore, their matters may be kept in abeyance till the decision of their cases. (Sd). Secretary (Colonies), Board of Revenue, Punjab." It is stated at the Bar that the petitioners want to avail the opportunity afforded in the afore‑quoted communication. Accordingly he has sought to withdraw this petition for leave to appeal. He has also expressed an apprehension that if relief is not given to the petitioners in accordance with the terms of the said communication the petitioners might be left with no remedy. While permitting the petitioners to withdraw this petition for leave to appeal we are of the view that the apprehension expressed by the learned counsel is unfounded. The fresh refusal might give a fresh cause of action with reference to the offer in question. In that context the petitioners if aggrieved might seek remedy in accordance with the law including the extraordinary remedy in the writ jurisdiction of the High Court. With these observations this petition is disposed of as withdrawn. MA.K./M‑1054/S Petition withdrawn.