Find a Lawyer

Writ Petition No. 2092 of 1964, decided on 29th November 1974.

-- Para. 5(a) read with West Pakistan Bas Stands and Traffic Control (Lahore) Ordinance (XIX of 1953), Ss. 6(a) & 12-Acquisition of land owner not heard when award passed and confirmed--Owner's application for reference to civil Court also refused-Award and refusal of reference to civil Court, held, without lawful authority and quashed-Proceedings neither validated under S. 12 nor owner liable to be condemned unheard due to lack of provision in statute for right of hearing-Such right to be read into every statute.

The grievance of the petitioner was that the acquisition was not made in accordance with the principles of Land Acquisition Act, and he was not heard even when the award was passed and confirmed by the Commissioner, as is borne out from the award itself. The petitioner's application for reference under section 18 to the civil Court was also refused by the Commissioner. Counsel for the respondent submitted that even if there is any violation of the principles of the Land Acquisition Act in the award or the acquisition it has been validated by section 12 of the Ordinance mentioned above.

Held : The submission has no force, for, it is now well-settled law that even if the Statute does not provide the right of hearing, it has to be read into it and no body can be condemned unheard The award in the case of the present petitioner and refusal of reference to the civil Court by the Commissioner are acts without lawful authority.

Petitioner in person.

Rao Dastgir Ahmad Khan for Respondent No. 2.

Date of hearing : 29th November 1974.

The petitioner is aggrieved of an award made in his absence for acquisition of his land measuring 14 kanals 17 marlas and 62 Sq. ft. situate in village Beta Basti Ram, Tehsil Lahore. The acquisition was made under Martial Law Order No. 112 of 1962. The Land Acquisition Collector, Lahore Improvement Trust by his order dated 8th February 1962 made the award which was confirmed by the Commissioner on 9^th June 1962. While passing the award, dealing with the area acquired from village Bela Basti Ram, he heard Nawabaada Rashid Ali Khan and another person Abdul Rauf son of another landowner Ashiq Hussain in regard to the demand of price for this estate.

2. The petition under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act was moved by the petitioner before the said Land Acquisition Collector. He was conveyed that his application was filed by the Commissioner. The letter addressed to him by the Land Acquisition Collector on 10th June 1964 is Annexure 'E'. In paragraph 8 of his application the petitioner submitted that "the amount of compensation as already assessed by the Collector is being forced on the petitioner by the Lahore Improvement Trust and the petitioner as such has no option but to receive the payment under protest reserving all his rights under this petition and statutory provisions of law which the petitioner declares shall remain unaffected." The award and the refusal of reference under section 18 to the civil Court by the Collector were challenged by a petition under Article 98 of 1962 Constitution which was admitted by this Court on 7^th July 1965, on the ground that the petitioner bad no opportunity of hearing before the Collector or the Commissioner at the time of making the award and its confirmation by the Commissioner. Petitioner's counsel is not present in Court and I have had no advantage of assistance on his behalf. Counsel for the Lahore Improvement Trust has referred to paragraph 5(a) of Martial Law Order No. 112 which authorised the Commissioner Lahore Division to acquire any land required for the stands, approaches and road and eject persons forcibly on payment of such com pensation as he deems fit. West Pakistan Bus Stands and Traffic Control (Lahore) Ordinance, 1963 was promulgated on 6th June 1963. In section 6(a) of the said Ordinance it is provided that the land for the Bus stand shall be acquired on payment of such compensation as the Commis sioner deems fit on the principles laid down in the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Section 12 deals with validation of any decree, judgment or order made in pursuance of Martial Law Order No. 112.

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the acquisition was not made in accordance with the principles of Land Acquisition Act, and he was no heard even when the award was passed and confirmed by the Commissioner, as is borne out from the award itself as mentioned above. The petitioner's application for reference under section 18 to the civil Court was also refused by the Commissioner. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that even if there is any violation of the principles of the Land Acquisition Act in the award or the acquisition it has been validated by section 11 of the Ordinance mentioned above. I am afraid, the submission has no force, for, it is now well-settled law that even if the Statute does not provide the right of hearing, it has to be read into it and no body can be condemned unheard. The award in the case of the present petitioner and refusal of reference to the civil Court by the Commissioner are acts without lawful authority. The petition succeeds and the award qua the petitioner is set aside and shall be made afresh in accordance with the principles laid down in the Land Acquisition Act. No costs.

S. A. H.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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