CLC 1994

1994 PLP 68 (CLC)

MUHAMMAD SHAFI‑‑‑Petitioner Versus COLONIES DEPARTMENT and others‑‑‑Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Writ Petition No. 2649 of 1990, decided on 28th September, 1991.
Honorable Judges
Tanvir Ahmed Khan, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1994 PLP 68 (CLC)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Tanvir Ahmed Khan, J
Parties MUHAMMAD SHAFI‑‑‑Petitioner Versus COLONIES DEPARTMENT and others‑‑‑Respondents
Primary Law Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994 PLP 68 (CLC)?

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

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1994 PLP 68 (CLC)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Tanvir Ahmed Khan, J.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 1994 PLP 68 (CLC) (MUHAMMAD SHAFI‑‑‑Petitioner Versus COLONIES DEPARTMENT and others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑

Representation

  • Ijaz Feroz and Ghulam Sabir for Petitioner. Hakam Qureshi for Respondents. . Rana Muhammad Arshad, AA,‑G.
  • Date of hearing: 28th September, 1991.

Headnotes / Summary

‑‑‑‑Art. 199‑‑‑Petitioner who had formed a society and got it registered with Assistant Registrar Joint Stock Companies contended that Government had accorded sanction for grant of lease of land to him for a period of ten years for construction of a hospital‑‑‑Petitioner had sought direction in nature of mandamus to Department to execute lease deed‑‑‑Authority had categorically stated that leasing of land in dispute to petitioner would amount to disturbing not less than 50 persons from their dwelling houses‑‑‑Case was remitted to Board of Revenue to pass appropriate order after giving opportunity of hearing to all parties concerned.

Judgment & Decree

‑‑‑‑Art. 199‑‑‑Petitioner who had formed a society and got it registered with Assistant Registrar Joint Stock Companies contended that Government had accorded sanction for grant of lease of land to him for a period of ten years for construction of a hospital‑‑‑Petitioner had sought direction in nature of mandamus to Department to execute lease deed‑‑‑Authority had categorically stated that leasing of land in dispute to petitioner would amount to disturbing not less than 50 persons from their dwelling houses‑‑‑Case was remitted to Board of Revenue to pass appropriate order after giving opportunity of hearing to all parties concerned. Ijaz Feroz and Ghulam Sabir for Petitioner. Hakam Qureshi for Respondents. . Rana Muhammad Arshad, AA,‑G. Date of hearing: 28th September, 1991. The petitioner has filed this Constitutional petition seeking direction that the respondents functionaries be directed to execute the formal lease deed. Facts in brief as averred in this Constitutional petition are that the petitioner formed a Society under the name of Azizia Hospital Society, G.T. Road, Baghbanpura, Lahore, on 8‑2‑1987 and got it registered under Societies Act XXI of 1860 with the Assistant Registrar Joint Stock Companies, Punjab, Lahore. It is his case that Government of Punjab accorded sanction for the grant of lease of Nazool land measuring 4 Kanals bearing Khasra No.2 situate at Mauza Achint Garh, Lahore, for a period of ten years for the construction of a welfare hospital. A formal memo. was issued by the Secretary (Colonies) on 16‑3‑1989 directing the Deputy Commissioner, Lahore, to execute the formal deed and register the same at the expense of the petitioner. In consequence thereof the formal possession was handed over to the petitioner through Roznamcha Waqiati dated 15‑11‑1989. The petitioner has sought direction in the nature of writ of mandamus to respondent to execute the lease deed. This grant of lease has been opposed by Mr. Hakam Qureshi, learned Advocate, who has filed C.M. No.320/91 on behalf of certain persons who, according to the averments made in this petition, are in occupation of this disputed plot and. are also paying the rent thereof. The learned Additional Advocate‑General has also taken strong exception to the conduct of the petitioner as is evident from the comments submitted by the respondents. It is evident from the perusal thereof that the petitioner earlier tried to grab Nazool land measuring 10 Kanals, 8 Marlas comprising Khasra No.90/78/8 at Hadbast Rakh Kot Lakhpat, Lahore, for petrol pump and similarly another piece of land of 2 Kanals, 12 Marlas out of Khasra No. 12 at Mauza Kotli Pir Abdur Rehman, Lahore in connivance with the employees of the Department. He has also pointed out that the Deputy Commissioner through his letter dated 1‑4‑1990 has opposed the execution of lease deed as according to him the grant of lease to the petitioner would disturb not less than 50 families from their dwelling houses. I have considered the contentions raised by the parties. I fail to understand under what circumstances the petitioner secured the possession when the lease was not formally executed and registered as directed by Colonies Department, Government of the Punjab. The Deputy Commissioner in his letter numbering Nazool‑90/46, dated 1‑4‑1990 had categorically stated that the leasing of this land would amount to disturbing not less than 50 persons from their dwelling houses. In this background, without dilating upon the facts of this case I remit this matter to the learned Member, Board of Revenue (Colonies), who shall pass appropriate order after giving opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned. H.B.T./M‑1193/L??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ??????????? Order accordingly