Find a Lawyer

Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 750 of 1975, decided on 15th July, 1981.

(On appeal from the judgment of Lahore High Court dated 15‑4‑1975 in Writ Petition No. 67‑R of 1973).

Constitution of Pakistan (1973)

--

------Arts. 199 & 185(3)‑Constitutional jurisdiction‑Order impugned before High Court same as one challenged in earlier writ petition by some one else and quashed and no longer alive‑View taken by Single Judge that writ petition became infructuous, held unexceptionable.

Rana Abdur Rahim Khan, Advocate and S. Wajid

Hussain, Advocate on‑Record for Petitioner.

Nemo for Respondents.

‑‑The facts of this case briefly stated are that the petitioner Muhammad 'Khan who is a claimant displaced person was allotted 38 Killas of land in village Khiali Shahpur, but certain P. 1 Units verified in his favour remained unsatisfied due to non‑availability of land. According to the petitioner, he and certain other persons filed 'mukhbari' application alleging that Ali Hassan respondent 3 had fraudulently obtained allotment of certain land, and as a result, out of the area cancelled from the allotment of Ali Hassan, land equipment to 899 and 59 P. I Units was allotted to him, respectively on Khatas Nos. 53 and 54 of Register R. L. 2 of Village Thatta Chawan. Latter on, however, the Additional Settlement Commissioner (Lands) held that the original allotment in favour of Ali Hassan was valid, and he, accordingly, by the order dated 20th March, 1977 cancelled the allotment of the land issued in petitioner's favour.

This order was challenged in Writ Petition No. 874 of 1967 in the former High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore which was accepted on 23rd May, 1968 on the technical ground with the result that the case was remanded to the Settlement Commissioner for fresh decision.

On remand learned Settlement Commissioner maintained the previous order by which petitioner's allotment was cancelled, and this led the petitioner to approach the High Court again, in Writ Petition No. 67‑R of 1973 filed by the petitioner was "liable to be dismissed as infructuous since the order against which it had been filed had already been quashed in Writ Petition No. 875‑R of 1967".

Rana Abdur Rahim Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner does not challenge the correctness of the fact that the order challenged by the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 67‑R of 1973 was the same as the on challenged in the earlier Writ Petition No. 875‑R of 1967. Since the impugned order has been quashed by the High Court, even if that was at the instance of someone else, it was no longer alive so as to be set aside again. No exception can, therefore, be taken with the view that has prevailed with the learned Single Judge in the High Court. Even otherwise on merits of the case, the learned Single Judge in the High Court rightly refused to interfere with the orders passed in the case.

The petition is therefore dismissed in limine.

Petition dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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