Restoration of property

2014 CLC 19 HIGH-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR Judicial Precedent

Ss. 22, 23, 25 & 46Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974), S.44Writ petitionScopeRestoration of propertyLimitationCondonation of delay

Petitioner moved an application for restoration of property but same was declared an evacuee land and review petition was thereagainst dismissed by the Custodian of Evacuee Property

Validity

Custodian of Evacuee Property had exclusive jurisdiction and acted in a lawful manner

Writ jurisdiction could not be exercised unless it was proved that authority or tribunal had passed the orders in excess of jurisdiction or the same was result of non-reading or misreading of evidence

Petitioner had not succeeded in pointing out any non-reading or misreading of evidence and could not bring his case for condonation of delay or within limitation

No illegality or irregularity or excess of jurisdiction exercised by the Custodian of Evacuee Property was found

No explanation had been brought on record for delayed institution of review petition and nothing was mentioned with regard to limitation from the date of knowledge or condonation of limitation

No application for condonation or affidavit to such effect had been moved and review petition was time-barred

Delay in filing review petition was result of the negligent conduct of the petitioner and no good or sufficient cause was available for condonation of delay

Findings of Custodian of Evacuee Property were concurrent findings of fact and High Court could neither resolve the question of facts not could sit as a court of appeal on concurrent findings

Writ petition was dismissed.