Find a Lawyer

IFHAMULLAH KHAN‑Petitioner

versus

FAIZANUL HAQ AND 2 OTHERS‑Respondents

Civil Petitions for Special Leave to Appeal Nos. 23 and 24 of 1971, decided on 30th June 1971.

(On appeal from the judgments and orders of the Lahore High Court at Lahore, dated the 2nd November 1970, in L. P. A. No. 376/69 and L. P. A. No. 377 of 1969).

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

Sch., Part III‑Building sites‑Auction of plots‑Terms and conditions of auction reciting that highest bids offered at auction were subject to approval of Additional Settlement Commissioner concerned who may or may not accept bids without assigning any reasons‑Highest bids offered at auction not approved and entire plot of land transferred to an allottee‑Held : bidders at auction, in circumstance, in absence of final approval of their bids, not clothed with any right in auctioned properties and had no locus standi to challenge transfer competently made‑Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 98.

M. Arif, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Ejaz Ahmad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners (in both the Petitions).

Abdul Aziz Qureshi, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Abdul Karim, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent No. 1 (in C. P. S. L. A. No. 23 of 1971).

Nemo for Respondent No. 2 in C. P. S. L. A. No. 23 of 1971 and Respondents in C. P. S. L. A. No. 24 of 1971.

Date of hearing : 30th June 1971.

SAJJAD AHMAD, J.‑

This order will dispose of two petitions for Special Leave to Appeal Nos. 23 and 24 of 1971, the former filed by Munshi Muhammad and Muhammad Parvaiz, and the latter by Ifhamullah Khan, who were the successful bidders in an auction of some plots in land comprised in Khasra No. 3953, Zaildar Road, Lahore. This land had earlier been allotted to respondent, Faizanul Haq, on the 12th of December 1949, and subsequently transferred to him by the Settlement Authorities. This land, which measured 10 kanals 2 marlas, was divided into 15 plots. Some of them were put to auction, in which Ifhamullah Khan, petitioner, was the highest bidder for one plot measuring 9 marlas, while the petitioners in the second petition (Munshi Muhammad and Muhammad Parvaiz) were the highest bidders of some other plots measuring 1 kanal 10 marlas. The confirm ing authorities did not accord approval to these auctions, and the land was in its entirety transferred in favour of the respon dent. The petitioners filed writ petitions in the High Court against this transfer, which were dismissed, on the short ground that as auction‑purchasers whose bids had not been finally approved by the relevant authorities, the petitioners were not clothed with any right in the auctioned properties, and had, therefore, no locus standi to challenge the transfer competently made by the Settlement Authorities in favour of the respondent.

The view formed by the High Court is unexceptionable. Since the auctions in favour of the petitioners were not finally approved, they did not acquire any right in the properties, and had, therefore, no locus standi to ask for their transfer. Accord ing to the terms and conditions of the auction itself, the highest bids offered in the auctions were subject to the approval of the Additional Settlement Commissioner concerned, who may or may not accept the bids, without assigning any reasons for his action.

The manner of the exercise of this discretion by the relevant authorities, as conferred by law, is not amenable to writ jurisdic tion of the High Court, unless it be found to be arbitrary or fanciful. This is not so in the present case.

The petitions are 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.