Find a Lawyer

RIAZ AHMAD versus MIRPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, MIRPUR

Mirpur Development Authority Ordinance 1974 Section 44 Azad Jammu and Kashmir High Court Code of Conduct, 1984, R38 Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIIth of 1974): Sections 42 and 44 written petition filed by the competent appellant which was allotted by the petitioner. Filed a challenge in which he challenged the authority's authority to change the sector plan and create new plots on the land that was already overturned. The written request was rejected. That no new plot was made as the alleged 6y applicant nor was it held that such controversial These questions can be resolved after recording and appreciating the evidence and the High Court, in its writ jurisdiction, can neither record the evidence nor initiate it, after the second definition the jurisdiction of all other courts has been settled in Mirpur Development. The Authority Ordinance was stopped by section 44 of 1974. In all cases of the Mirpur Development Authority, filing a writ petition challenging the prosecution of the Mirpur Development Authority or any of its superiors may, in the circumstances, relieve the applicant and, in the circumstances, appropriate treatment for the bereaved If there is any question as to the fact, it is the duty of the High Court to record the evidence, where necessary, and to say that even adhering to the definition of evidence, the High Court was not justified in dismissing the constitutional petition. That the applicant was able to prove that the plot allotted to him was vacated without legal authority. Was transferred to RAID, the Supreme Court accepted the appeal and dismissed the transfer of the applicant's plot. tax advocates from Mirpur Khas lawyer