1991 PLP 386 (SCMR)
RIZWAN COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED — Petitioner Versus PUNJAB UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC STAFF ASSOCIATION and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1991 PLP 386 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Nasim Hasan Shah, S. Usman Ali Shah and Naimuddin, JJ |
| Parties | RIZWAN COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED — Petitioner Versus PUNJAB UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC STAFF ASSOCIATION and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1991 PLP 386 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1991 PLP 386 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Nasim Hasan Shah, S. Usman Ali Shah and Naimuddin, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1991 PLP 386 (SCMR) (RIZWAN COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED — Petitioner Versus PUNJAB UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC STAFF ASSOCIATION and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Iftikhar Ahmad Dar, Advocate Supreme Court with Tanvir Ahmad, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- A.R. Shaukat, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Danish Malik, Advocate Supreme Court with Ch. M. Aslam, Advocate-on-Record for Respondent No.1.
- Nemo for Respondents Nos. 2 to 12.
- Date of hearing: 4th April, 1990.
- Iftikhar Ahmad Dar, Advocate Supreme Court with Tanvir Ahmad, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- A.R. Shaukat, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Danish Malik, Advocate Supreme Court with Ch. M. Aslam, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent No.1.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the judgment, dated 6-4-1988 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Writ Petition No.402/R of 1976).
O. I, R.10
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)
Locus standi to be impleaded as a party
Land in question was sold to petitioner-Society at one stage but such sale was set aside by Supreme Court by its judgment in Lahore Improvement Trust's case reported as P L D 1971 SC 811
After judgment of Supreme Court, petitioner-Society had no longer any standing or locus standi in the matter
Application to be impleaded as a party was dismissed in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.‑‑‑The land which is the subject‑matter of the dispute in Civil Petitions Nos.3.34‑R/88, 512/88, 537/88 and 545/88 was at one stage sold to the petitioner‑society on 1‑5‑196‑
1. But this sale was set aside in the proceedings brought before this Court by the Lahore Improvement Trust. claiming that the area involved in the sale stood acquired by the Trust for the Campus of the Punjab University vide judgment dated 20‑10‑1971 (see Lahore Improvement Trust v. Custodian, Evacuee Property P L D 1971 S C 811). A question arose as to whether an area of 406 kanals 1 marla, which was included in the sale to the petitioner‑society but not included in the Scheme of the Trust, also stood invalidated by this decision. This Court vide judgment dated 4‑4‑1990 passed in Civil Appeal No.149 of 1985 (Rizwan Co‑operative Society Limited v. Lahore Development Authority and others) has held that the entire sale made in favour of the petitioner‑society including the area in question measuring 406 kanals 1 marla stood invalidated by this decision. It appears that this very land was got allotted by various persons either through allotment orders or by filing mukhbari applications or appeals against the allotment orders so obtained by different persons. These allotments etc. were questioned in the High Court by the Punjab University authorities through Writ Petition No.402‑R of 1976. This petition was allowed by the High Court vide judgment dated 6‑4‑1988 and the aforesaid judgment has been questioned by the effected parties through several petitions for leave to appeal inter alia Civil Petition No.334‑R/1988, Civil Petition No.512/1988, Civil Petition No.537/1988 and Civil Petition No.545/1988. The petitioner‑society has applied to be impleaded as a party and has also filed a petition for leave (Civil Petition No.571/1988). It is obvious that after the judgment of this Court reported in Lahore Improvement Trust v. Custodian Evacuee Property (P L D 1971 S C 811) and the recent judgment in Civil Appeal No.149 of 1985 (Rizwan Cooperative Society Limited v. Lahore Development Authority and others) the petitioner‑society has no longer any standing or locus standi in the matter. AA./R‑157/S. Appeal dismissed.