Find a Lawyer

CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, ISLAMABAD THROUGH CHAIRMAN versus COMMISSIONER, C.D.A., ISLAMABAD

Article 3 (3) of the Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199, the review process on the constitutional petition was finally decided by the Supreme Court and the authorities were directed to pay compensation to the victims. Some were compensated when suddenly the Deputy Commissioner, the Capital Development Authority, initiated an automated review process under section 36 (3) of the Capital Development Authority Ordinance, 1960, and removed the names of some landlords, Respondents / Commissioners Capital Development Authority allowed landlords and deputy commissioners to file an appeal through the mob It put aside the order passed under Moto powers. Upon receipt of the notice, the Deputy Commissioner working under the Capital Development Authority Ordinance, 1960, visited the site himself and inspected the existence of houses and structures. And then according to the policy, the Capital Development Authority promised to remove the rubble of buildings subject to a deduction of 15% of the value of the houses, after the Supreme Court's observations, authorities delayed the payment of legitimate compensation. To comply with a moral intention that was not valid on any legal or moral basis when honors And the Supreme Court deemed it correct and proper; the Deputy Commissioner, Capital Development Authority was not empowered to exclude the names of the proportional persons from the award while the use of constitutional jurisdiction was approved using the powers of the Court Review. Declined order refused to be interrupted Defendant / Commissioner Capital Development Authority's requests were denied famous lower court advocate from Fateh Pur lawyer