Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD YASIN versus GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB THROUGH SECRETARY HOUSING AND PHYSICAL PLANNING DEPARTMENT

Section 3 intra-Court Appeal Scope Appellants challenged the High Court's Single Judge's order that the Single Judge granted relief to five writ petitioners but refused to grant five reliefs to the petitioners in the same appeal, as the issue of appeals stands. ? In the case of equality with the appellants' five applicants, it is further claimed that their occupation of the disputed plots was not specifically denied while the authorities acknowledged their construction and they were entitled to an allotment. The judge refused to grant him an exemption by a short sentence stating that he was ambiguous by a single judge for failing to establish his claim and was not based on any legally valid reasons and that he neglected the admission of the authorities. Was the result of which not only the possession of the appellants was admitted but also the construction taken by them. Was also featured. It is stated that the assistance provided to the five applicants was illegally denied the AP The intra-court appeal was allowed

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010

• Mst. AZRA BIBI v. CHIEF SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER, PUNJAB, LAHORE 2010 YLR 2159
• CHAMAN DIN v. State 2010 YLR 2168
• SAFDAR ALI v. State 2010 YLR 2184
• MUHAMMAD NAWAZ alias MAAJI v. State 2010 YLR 2198
• Mst. SHAMIM GHAFFAR v. GHULAM SHABBIR 2010 YLR 2216
• GHULAM SARWAR v. PROVINCE OF PUNJAB 2010 YLR 2225
• ABDUL GHAFFAR alias BILLA v. State 2010 YLR 2228
• MUHAMMAD RAMZAN v. GHULAM SHAFIA 2010 YLR 2236

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2010 →

famous supreme court advocate from Sambrial lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes