RABIA CITY, RESIDENTS WELFARE ASSOCIATION (REGD.) versus CANTONMENT BOARD, FAISAL CANNT
Sections 2 (viii), 108 and 185 (1), the first and second time the constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitution was not taken up with the approval of the construction project after payment of the compensation fee does not constitute lease According to the building plan approved by the construction cantonment board in the plot given above, the applicant said that the building was upset and a constitutional petition challenging such construction was filed. The respondent contacted the Cantonment Board and the Cantonment Board on payment of the compensation fee, while the defendant withheld further action against the defendant in the first-time terms. Under section 185 (1) of the Cantonment Act, 1924, if a building was administered by the cantonment board, then the building would have been capable of being treated unlawfully, otherwise the structure specified without the prior consent of the competent authority specified in section 2 (viii). Could not be affected. There was no consensus in the Cantonment Act, 1924, because in the present case the clause was obtained because the property owned was not managed by the Cantonment Board and with the consent of the Competent Authority which was required before the formation could take effect. For the composition of the cantonment board and the defendant reached, the cantonment board was instructed with no legal authority to perform its duty according to the law
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
