1984 PLP 1388 (SCMR)
MUHABBAT ALI‑‑Petitioner Versus SETTLEMENT AND REHABILITATION COMMISSIONER, BAHAWALPUR
| Citation | 1984 PLP 1388 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Nasim Hasan Shah and Shafiur Rahman, JJ |
| Parties | MUHABBAT ALI‑‑Petitioner Versus SETTLEMENT AND REHABILITATION COMMISSIONER, BAHAWALPUR |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1984 PLP 1388 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1984 PLP 1388 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Nasim Hasan Shah and Shafiur Rahman, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1984 PLP 1388 (SCMR) (MUHABBAT ALI‑‑Petitioner Versus SETTLEMENT AND REHABILITATION COMMISSIONER, BAHAWALPUR). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Syed Muhammad Ali Zaidi, Advocate Supreme Court and Inayat Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Shahzad Jahangir, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents. Date of hearing: 13th April, 1983.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment, dated 17‑3‑1979 of the Lahore High Court in Writ Petition No.96‑R of 1979). ‑‑‑Art.185(3)‑‑Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act (XLVII of 1958), Ss.10 & 11‑‑Petitioner failing to shake allotment made in favour of respondents by resort to normal remedy of appeal and revision‑‑Held, could not be permitted to re‑agitate same matter by invoking another provision of law and changing ground of attack‑‑Leave to appeal refused.
Judgment & Decree
(On appeal from the judgment, dated 17‑3‑1979 of the Lahore High Court in Writ Petition No.96‑R of 1979). ‑‑‑Art.185(3)‑‑Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act (XLVII of 1958), Ss.10 & 11‑‑Petitioner failing to shake allotment made in favour of respondents by resort to normal remedy of appeal and revision‑‑Held, could not be permitted to re‑agitate same matter by invoking another provision of law and changing ground of attack‑‑Leave to appeal refused. Syed Muhammad Ali Zaidi, Advocate Supreme Court and Inayat Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner. Shahzad Jahangir, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents. Date of hearing: 13th April, 1983. NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.‑‑ The petitioner challenged the propriety and legality of the allotment made in favour of Ali Muhammad (now dead and represented by his legal representatives) on the grounds, inter‑alia, that he had a preferential claim to the allotment by filing an appeal and revision before the Settlement authorities. Having failed therein he after some time, challenged the allotment through a Mukhbari application under sections 10 and 11 of the Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act, 1958, urging a different ground for challenging the allotment in his favour Here too, he was unsuccessful. His Writ Petition even having failed hence this petition. This petition is liable to dismissal on the short ground that having failed to shake the allotment made in favour of the respondents by resort to the normal remedy of appeal and revision, he could not be permitted to re‑agitate the same matter, by invoking another provision of law and changing his ground of attack. Dismissed. S, Q, Leave refused.