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.
Intra‑Court Appeal No. 434 of 1980, heard on 7th December, 1981.
‑‑S. 10‑Auction of property‑Appellant transferred plot under Reservation Scheme in 1961 and getting PTD in 1963 after paying price‑Seventeen years later Deputy Administrator (Residual Properties), ordering auction of plot‑Held, after transfer of property and issuance of PTD there being no property "available" for disposal order of Deputy Administrator without jurisdiction.
Muhammad Hafeez for Appellant.
Nemo for Respondents Nos. 1 and 2.
Date of hearing : 7th December, 1581. .
The appellant was transferred a plot measuring 1 kanal and 18 marlas comprising khasra No. 2384 situate at Lawrance Road, Mauza Mozang, Lahore under the Reservation Scheme by the Additional Settlement Commissioner on 20‑9‑1961. He was asked to pay the transfer price thereof as Rs. 26,000, on 23‑4‑1962, which he did, and thereafter a PTD was issued in his favour on 7‑3‑1963. Seventeen years later, the Deputy Administrator (Residual Properties) ordered auction of the plot. The petitioner's application was dismissed by the Deputy Administrator (Residual Properties). He filed a Constitutional petition bearing No. 523/R/80 which has been dismissed by a learned Single Judge on 30‑6‑1980. Hence, this I. C. A.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the observation of the learned Single Judge that the petitioner should seek relief from the civil Courts is erroneous because in the matter the civil Courts have no jurisdiction. In any case, the appellant having been transferred the plot as long ago in 1963, the plot was not "available" and the Deputy Administrator (Residual Properties) had‑no jurisdiction over the corpus, hence his order is without lawful authority.
3. The learned counsel for the appellant is quite correct that after the transfer and issuance of the P. T. D., there was no property "available" which could be disposed of by the Deputy Administrator (Residual Properties) Property, over which alone i.e. "available property" he could exercise jurisdiction. Therefore, his order is without lawful authority and of no legal effect. The appeal is allowed but as nobody has appeared to oppose the appeal, there shall be no order as to costs.
K. M. A. Appeal accepted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer