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.
Writ Petition No. 30/R of 1980, heard on 16th February, 1982.
‑‑ Art. 199 read with Laws (Continuance in Force) Order [C. M._ L. A.s Order No. t of 1977], Art. 2‑Border Area Com mittee not lawfully constituted‑Notice issued by‑Petitioner allotted land in 1960‑Allotment checked twice by Border Area Committee in 1962 and kept intact‑Border Area Committee issuing notice on 6th December, 1979 to petitioner‑Petitioner contending Committee issuing notice not lawfully constituted‑Respondent conceding notice may be quashed provided order not to bar fresh proceedings by present Committee‑Petitioner satisfied if present notice quashed Notice, held, issued without lawful authority in circumstances.
Ch: Azimuddin for Petitioner.
Ch. Muhammad Rafiq Khan for Respondent.
Date of hearing : 16th February, 1982.
This petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan read with Laws (Continuance in Force) Order, 1977 prays for a declaration that the proceeding before the respondent are without lawful authority and the notice dated 6th December, 1979 on the basis of which the proceedings have been commenced has been issued without jurisdiction and is nullity m the eyes of law.
2. The facts necessary for the purposes of this petition, briefly stated, are that the petitioner was allotted 255 kanals and 15 marlas of land in village Minhala Khurd, Tchsil and District; Lahore on 26th July, 1960 which allotment was checked by the order Area Committee in March, 1962 and again on 4th November, 1962. This allotment was kept intact all along when suddenly, the Border Area Committee had issued the impugned notice dated 6th December, 1979 to the petitioner presumably on the application of one Col. Sher Afzal Khan. This writ petition is directed against the aforesaid notice dated 6th December, 1979 and the consequent proceedings based thereon.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the respondent Committee had not been lawfully constituted inasmuch as it is required that the Committee shall consist of two Members, one of whom is to be a representative of the Rehabilitation Commissioner and the other a representa tive of the Pakistan Army and the Rehabilitation Act, 1956 having been repealed with effect from 1st July, 1974 there was no Rehabilitation Com missioner existing on the day this Committee was constituted and the ques tion of the nomination of any of his representatives on that day thus could never arise. He submitted that the factum of the illegal constitution of the Border Area Committee was taken into consideration by the Legislator himself and to have properly constituted Committee, the West Pakistan Border Area Regulation, 1959 was amended by the Punjab Ordinance (III of 1981). Para. 4 of the aforesaid Martial Law Regulation was amended so as to substitute the words "one being a representative of the Rehabilita tion Commissioner and the other a representative of the Pakistan Army" by the words "one to be appointed by the Board of Revenue and the other a representative of the Pakistan Army to be nominated by the General Headquarters". In the context of the above position, the learned counsel contended that the position that now emerges is that the Committee which issued the notice was not lawfully constituted.
4. The learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, contended, that the respondent concedes that the impugned notice may be quashed, provided the quashing of the notice shall not be a bar to the initiation of fresh proceedings by the present lawfully constituted Committee.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner, in reply, submitted that the petitioner would be satisfied if the present notice is quashed.
6. In view of the foregoing, I accept the writ petition and declare that the impugned notice dated 6th December, 1979 has been issued without lawful authority. The above declaration, however, shall not preclude the lawfully constituted Border Area Committee from acting in accordance with law.
There will, however, be no order as to costs.
K. M. A. Petition accepted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer