Punjab Government Memo
Punjab Government Memo legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
Art. 199 read with Punjab Municipal Act (I of 1911), S. 192(3) and Punjab Government Memo. dated 7-1-1952 sanctioning Town Planning Scheme for area known as Cattle Fair Ground at Lyallpur and subsequent official correspondence
Writ petition-Locus standi-Site in dispute admittedly forming part of public park reserved in Scheme sanctioned by Government for benefit of persons settled on scheme-Licence of encroachment issued by Municipal Committee not giving any right in property to petitioners and merely protecting them from action under Municipal Administration Ordinance-Decision of Board of Revenue in issuing direction for sale of site through public auction itself without jurisdiction, no modification in Scheme being possible without inviting objections from persons settled on scheme-Petitioners, held, encroachers having no rightful contact with site and Court not to act in aid of encroachment-Petitioners, held further, possessed no locus standi to file writ petition, in circumstances.-[Locus standi].
"Punjab Government Memo", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/14242
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Punjab Government Memo"
P L D 1973 Lahore 726
SAVA BEGUM‑Petitioner Versus THE BOARD OF REVENUE, PUNJAB, LAHORE AND ANOTHER‑‑Respondents
Court:P L D 1960 Supreme Court (Pak
Mst. BASHIRI-Appellant Versus THE ADDITIONAL REHABILITATION COMMIS SIONER, MULTAN and another-Respondents
Court: Rehabilitation Settlement Scheme as amended by Punjab Government Memo. No. 831-R (L), dated 5-2-1953-Land allotted to A prior to 5-2-1953-Widowed relation of allottee B not entitled to re-open allotment of A.P L D 1972 Rev
MOOR HASSAN‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
Court: PunjabP L D
HASSAN ALI‑Petitioner Versus NUR AHMED‑Respondent
Court:1994 S C M R 465
ALAMSHER and others‑‑‑Appellants Versus THE MEMBER, BOARD OF~REVENUE (COLONIES), PUNJAB,
Court: Supreme Court of PakistanP L D 1963 (W
Ch. INAYAT ULLAH AND OTHERS‑Petitioners Versus WEST PAKISTAN GOVERNMENT AND OTHERS Respondents
Court: High Court1985 S C M R 449
BASARA and others — Appellants Versus KHUSHI MUHAMMAD and others — Respondents
Court: High CourtP L D 1962 Supreme Court 42
Syed ABDUR RASHID‑Appellant Versus (1) PAKISTAN, THROUGH THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF REFUGEES
Court: High CourtP L D 1976 Supreme Court 435
Sub. MUHAMMAD ASGHAR‑Appellant Versus Mst. SAFIA BEGUM AND ANOTHER‑Respondents
Court: ‑‑ S. 10(3) and Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 98‑Allotment of horse/mule breeding grant‑Writ jurisdiction‑Collector, subject to control of Board of Revenue‑Vested with descretion to allot remount breeding tenancy‑High Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Art. 98 ‑‑ Not justified in interfering with discharge of functions entrusted to Collector under law‑Court or tribunal, having jurisdic tion, determining a question‑Cannot be said to have acted illegally or with material irregularity merely for reason of having come to an erroneous decision on a question of fact or even of law‑Constitutional provision of Art. 98‑Not designed to empower High Court to inter fere with decision of Court or tribunal of inferior jurisdiction merely because of decision being wrong in its opinion.‑Writ.P L D 1960 (W
Mirza ANWAR BEG and others‑Petitioners Versus Mirza ULFAT BEG and others‑Respondents
Court: (b) Writ‑---Petition not mentioning law point on which petition was ultimately decided‑Omission not fatal to petition because Court is not relieved of obligation to interpret law correctly Tariq Transport's case P L D 1958 S C (Pak.) 437 not applicable.