Find a Lawyer

(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 3rd February 1967, in Writ Petition No. 92/R of 1967).

---[as amended by Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) (Amendment) Ordinance (II of 1962)], S. 10 Question whether amendment of section could not affect pending cases (of transfer in favour of informer)‑Special Leave to Appeal granted by Supreme Court.

Muhammad Amin v. Chief Settlement Commissioner P L 1 1966 Lah. 473 rel.

Ghulam Mujadid Mirza, Senior Advocate Supreme Court (Kh. Shaukat Ali, Advocate Supreme Court with him) instructed by Ch. Khalil‑ur‑Rahman, Attorney for Petitioner.

Nemo for Respondent.

Date of hearing : 8th October 1968.

An evacuee property transferred in favour of the petitioner as an Informer, was set aside by the Chief Settlement Commissioner, while dismissing a Review petition by another claimant. The ground given was that the transfer had been made by a delegatee of the Chief Settlement Commissioner on the 9th May 1962 at a time when he had no such power in view of the amendment of section 10 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958 by Ordinance No. 2 of 1962.

The petitioner filed a writ petition without success in the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore. When this petition came up for hearing on the 9th May 1967, it was contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the amendment did not affect pending cases and in support reliance was placed upon the decision of the High Court in the case of Muhammad Amin v. Chief Settlement Commissioner (P L D 1966 Lah. 473). The learned counsel was, however, unable to establish that any proceeding was pending in regard to the claim of the petitioner even after the repeal of section 10 of the Act. He was, therefore, given an adjournment to produce documents to establish that fact.

The petitioner has now filed copies of application made by him to the Director, Enforcement and of an application to the Chief Settlement and Rehabilitation Commissioner. It appears that the application to the Director, Enforcement was filed on the 21st July 1961. Earlier also‑ he had filed an application complaining against the irregular transfer in favour of Allah Diya. The petitioner's claim as an informer was ultimately accepted by the Settlement and Rehabilitation Commissioner with powers of the Chief Settlement and Rehabilitation Commissioner on 9‑5‑1962. These papers clearly show that the case of the petitioner was pending at the time of the repeal of section 10 of the Act.

Leave is accordingly granted. Security in the sum of Rs. 1,000.

Leave granted.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.