Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 242 of 1967, decided on 11th October 1967.
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 23rd May 1967, in Writ Petition No. 570/R of 1965).
Sched., Part 1‑House already transferred to K wrongly included in earmarking list and transferred to A in whose name lot drawn‑Settlement Authorities realizing mistake canceling transfer in favour of A‑High Court in writ jurisdiction, held, rightly refused to interfere with order‑Special Leave to Appeal refused by Supreme Court.
A. R. Shaukat, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Wali Muhammad Khawaja, Senior Attorney for Petitioner.
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing : 11th October 1967.
‑The dispute in this case is with respect to House No. B‑I‑S‑3‑8, Mandi Chuharkana, District Sheikhupura.
On 10‑10‑54, this house was transferred to Khadija Begum on her C. H. form. Later, by mistake, this house was included in the earmarking list and thereafter it was drawn by lots in the name of the petitioner Atta Muhammad on 25‑5‑60 and a P. T. O. was issued in his favour on 31‑10‑60. When the said fact was brought to the notice of the Deputy Settlement Commis sioner, he, while canceling the lot drawn in favour of Atta Muhammad, directed that the latter should be allowed "choice to earmark some other house in the list of auction" and his order was upheld in appeal and on revision. The High Court also declined to interfere with the order of the Settlement authorities in its writ jurisdiction.
The learned counsel has found it difficult to challenge the legality and propriety of the order of the Settlement authorities. It will suffice to say that as the property had already been transferred to Mst. Khadija Begum the same should not have been put in the earmarking list. The High Court has, therefore, rightly declined to interfere with the order of the Settlement Department.
This petition is accordingly dismissed.
Leave refused.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer