Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Free WhatsApp lawyer help
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

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.

💬 Instant WhatsApp chat ⚖ Verified lawyer directory ⏰ Replies in minutes

NOOR MUHAMMAD versus CHIEF SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER


Article 98 of the House Order of Settlement Authority cannot be interfered with, according to the Homeless Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (Schedule VI 195 of 1958), the Schedule, Part I read with the Constitution of Pakistan (1962). Is.

1970 S C M R 490

Present : Muhammad Yaqub Ali and Wahiduddin Ahmad, JJ

NOOR MUHAMMAD AND 8 OTHERS‑Petitioners

versus

CHIEF SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER, LAHORE

AND 8 OTHERS‑Respondents

Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. K‑96 of 1969, decided on 13th January 1970.

(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Karachi Bench, Karachi, dated the 13th March 1969, in Petition No. 146 of 1967).

Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958),

Sched., Part I read with Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 98‑Divisibility of house‑Order of Settlement Authorities cannot be interfered with in writ jurisdiction.

Iqbal Qazi, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by K. A. Ghani, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.

Nemo for Respondents.

Date of hearing : 13th January 1970

ORDER

MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, J.

‑Mr. Iqbal Qazi concedes that c the divisibility of the property in dispute was not open to question before the High Court in writ jurisdiction. He, how ever, contends that in allotting the upper floor to the petitioners the Chief Settlement Commissioner did not take into considera tion the material circumstances that the petitioners were allottees and in prior occupation of the ground floor.

Once it is conceded and rightly so that the High Court did not have the jurisdiction to interfere with the division of the property, we fail to see how the mode of partition can be the subject‑matter of a judicial review under Article 98 of the Constitution. The petitioners were in occupation of only one room on the ground floor. The Chief Settlement Commissioner in the circumstances of the case exercised his discretion properly in transferring to the petitioners the upper floor and giving the ground floor to the respondents at Nos. 6 to 8.

The petition for leave to appeal is dismissed.

Leave refused.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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

🔍 Find a Lawyer
Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad
online advocate from Mirpur Khas lawyer

SJP Lawyers DirectorySJP Lawyers Directory

Pakistan's leading legal-technology platform and verified lawyer directory — connecting clients, lawyers, law firms and Bar Associations across the country.

Get in Touch

© 2018–2027 SJP Legnocrats (SMC-Private) Limited. All rights reserved.
Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes
👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.