Find a Lawyer

KHUSHI MUHAMMAD versus DIVISIONAL CANAL OFFICER, LAYYAH,

Article 68 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitution Petition was allegedly established for his personal use of termination of the terminated petition when the applicant thereafter stated that Khalid Respondent, without interruption, said that the application was submitted to the Authority for the restoration of the space authority. Inquiries and preliminary measures, the water course / vacant was restored under section 68A of the Canal and Drainage Act, 1873, the applicant alleged that the authority was bound under section 68A of the canal and drainage Act 1873. Is, first to inquire and then to pass the order and that the applicant did not have the opportunity to be the required party, the respondent claimed that the net has existed for a long time and that he has owned his land for the last 30 years. Is irrigating and authority is justified while respondents of the inappropriate order have been approved find the dispute valid Because it could irrigate the land was being discussed pure past 30 years and was permitted to pass an order that the hearing the applicant was not justified to eliminate this option. The proper procedure for the applicant was to approach the civil court with the jurisdiction necessary to resolve his complaint. By the High Court in exercising arbitrary constitutional jurisdiction immigration advocates email from Kala Shah Kaku lawyer