1989 PLP 1819 (SCMR)
GUL ASUAL and others‑‑Petitioners Versus ADDITIONAL SECRETARY, HOME, N.-W.F.P.
| Citation | 1989 PLP 1819 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Usman Ali Shah, JJ |
| Parties | GUL ASUAL and others‑‑Petitioners Versus ADDITIONAL SECRETARY, HOME, N.-W.F.P. |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 1819 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 1819 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Usman Ali Shah, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 1819 (SCMR) (GUL ASUAL and others‑‑Petitioners Versus ADDITIONAL SECRETARY, HOME, N.-W.F.P.). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for Petitioners.
- Date of hearing: 15th May, 1989.
- Oazi Muhammad Anwar, Advocate Supreme Court and Abdul Hamid Oureshi,
- Mahfooz Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for, Respondent No. 4.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar dated 12‑2‑1989, passed in W.P.No. 39 of 1981). Provincially Administered Tribal Areas Civil Procedure (Special Provisions) Regulation (II of 1975) ‑‑‑S.17‑‑Jurisdiction of Tribunal‑‑Record not showing any hint whatsoever that the petitioners had ever objected to the jurisdiction of the Tribunals constituted under S.17 of the Regulation, 1975‑‑Objection raised in Supreme Court at such belated stage regarding jurisdiction of the forums, held, was, immaterial‑‑Leave to appeal refused. Oazi Muhammad Anwar, Advocate Supreme Court and Abdul Hamid Oureshi, Mahfooz Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for, Respondent No.
4. Nemo for the Remaining Respondents.
Judgment & Decree
USMAN ALI SHAH, J.‑‑The petitioners seek leave to appeal against the judgment and order of the Peshawar High Court dated 12‑2‑1989, passed in Writ Petition No. 39 of 1981, arising out of a case wherein, on the application dated 11‑2‑1976 of respondents No. 4‑7, the Deputy Commissioner Chitral respondent No. 3 vide his order dated 6‑1‑77 ordered that 11 Chakawarms of land be taken over from the petitioners and handed over to the respondents Nos.4‑
7. Appeal of the petitioners against this order before the AddI.Commissioncr Malakand Division Saidu Sharif failed vide judgment dated 27‑9‑
77. Their revision petition before the AddI. Secretary, Govt. of NWFP Home and Tribal Affairs Department was also rejected vide judgment dated 28‑1‑
81. The petitioners filed writ petition before the Peshawar High Court. A learned Division Bench of the High Court while dismissing the writ petition vide its judgment dated 12‑2‑1989 observed that the matter has already taken number of years for its adjudication and it is not in the interest of justice to reopen the same on mere technical objection with regard to the jurisdiction of the judicial forums. The learned counsel for the petitioners raised before us the same arguments which were raised before the learned High Court. He raised objection to the jurisdiction of the forums which adjudicated the controversial matter between the parties. The record of the case does not show any hint whatsoever A that the petitioners have ever objected to the jurisdiction of the Tribunals constitued under section 17 of the Regulation of 1975 for the purpose. The objection of the learned counsel regarding the jurisdiction of the forums at this belated stage is immaterial. The result is that this petition has no force which is accordingly dismissed. Leave refused M.A.K./G‑196/S Leave refused.