2009 PLP 294 (MLD)
Shri MAHANT BAWA BAGU LAIGIR MAHARAJ — Petitioner Versus DIRECTOR PARKS AND HORTICULTURE, CITY DISTRICT GOVERNMENT KARACHI and 2 others — Respondents
| Citation | 2009 PLP 294 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | Shri MAHANT BAWA BAGU LAIGIR MAHARAJ — Petitioner Versus DIRECTOR PARKS AND HORTICULTURE, CITY DISTRICT GOVERNMENT KARACHI and 2 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2009 PLP 294 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2009 PLP 294 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2009 PLP 294 (MLD) (Shri MAHANT BAWA BAGU LAIGIR MAHARAJ — Petitioner Versus DIRECTOR PARKS AND HORTICULTURE, CITY DISTRICT GOVERNMENT KARACHI and 2 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Noor Muhammad Dayo holding brief for Mr. Jhamat Jethanad, Advocate for Hindu Panchayat along with Dr. Raj Ashok, Vice-President of Hindu Panchayat.
Headnotes / Summary
Art. 199
Constitutional petition
Main grievance raised by the petitioner was against the Hidu Panchayat Committee, who was managing the affairs of temple, the subject-matter of the petition
Main cause being between the Hindu Panchayat and the petitioner to control and manage the affairs of temples and no material was available on record for the High Court to interfere with it under its constitutional jurisdiction, however to satisfy the petitioner, High Court observed that the concerned four plots which were going to be allotted by the Authority, would be property of the temple and would be utilized for religious purpose only, while the parties, who were contesting their entitlement to run the temple would be subject to the pending litigation.
Judgment & Decree
After hearing the petitioner who is present in person, Mr. Manzoor Ahmed, learned counsel for CDGK and Dr. Raj Ashok, Vice-President of Hindu Panchayat, it appears that the main grievance raised by the petitioner is against the Hindu Panchayat Committee, who is managing the affairs of temple, subject-matter of this petition, located at Clifton, Karachi, through its Vice-President Dr. Raj Ashok. It is stated by the petitioner that earlier his father was managing the affairs of twenty-two (22) temples in Karachi and after his death he is managing all these temples. Petitioner submits that he has also filed various proceedings in respect of different properties against the Evacuee Trust Property Board to challenge their orders in relation to the declaration of evacuee properties or not. He further submits that Hindu Panchayat Committee has also intervened in some matters but did not succeed and filed Suit No.23 of 1990 which was dismissed and against the dismissal order an Appeal being No.212 of 1999 was preferred, which is still pending adjudication. Mr. Manzoor Ahmed, learned counsel for CDGK submits that as far as the role of CDGK is concerned, it has only improved the status of the said temple in order to give a better look which is located at prominent place and such renovation work has also been done with the consultation of Hindu Panchayat. He further submits that through an agreement, four (4) plots have also been agreed for the purpose of benefits of temples and to be utilized for religious cause. Mr. Manzoor Ahmed, learned counsel also submits that the CDGK had not tampered or altered the status of temple and its original position still remains intact. Keeping in view the case of parties in juxtaposition, it appears that the main cause between is the Hindu Panchayat and the petitioner to control and manage the affairs of temples and no material is coming on record in the constitutional jurisdiction for this Court to interfere it. Anyhow to satisfy the petition, it may be observed that in case, four (4) plots which are going to be allotted by CDGK, will be property of the temple and will be utilized for religious purpose only while the parties, who are contesting their entitlement to run the temple will be subject to the pending litigations. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of in above terms along with the listed-application. H.B.T./S-84/K Order accordingly.