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.
Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 345 of 1979, decided on 13th April, 1983.
(On appeal against the judgment/order of the Lahore High Court in W. P. No. 145/R‑76, dated 28‑2‑1979).
‑‑ Art. 185(3)‑Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958), S. 10‑‑Contention that allotment made in June, 1959 was invalid, held, .too late in the day to contend‑Fact of respondents being Jammu & Kashmir refugees having established and Settlement Authorities holding respondents to be entitled to hold on to entitlements‑High Court, held further, could not disturb restoration of such allotment.
Amjad Ch., Advocate Supreme Court and S. Inayat Hussain, Advocate -on‑Record for Petitioner.
S. Wajid Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) and Shahzad Jahangir, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents Nos. 1 and 2:
Date of hearing : 13th April, 1983.
The petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, dated 28‑2‑1979 whereby his consti tutional petition challenging the restoration of the land allotted to respondents Nos. 1 and 2 was dismissed.
The land in dispute was allotted in 1957 to the aforesaid respondents by way of maintenance as Jammu and Kashmir refugees. In 1972 it was cancelled from their names for various reasons without hearing them. The respondents filed a constitutional petition which succeeded and the matter was remitted to the settlement authorities. The Settlement commissioner by his order, dated 26th January, 1976 allowed them to retain the land. The petitioner who got the allotment after the land was resumed from the respondents invoked the constitutional jurisdiction for getting the cancella tion order against respondents Nos. 1 and 2 restored. He failed.
The learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the initial allotment made to the respondents in 1959 was itself illegal and it could not be allowed to remain in tact. Besides the ground taken up for cancellation of the land was not only that respondents were not Jammu and Kashmir refugees but that they were not cultivating and utilizing it for their main tenance. Even if they were found to be Jammu & Kashmir refugees it was not sufficient to bring back the restoration of the allotment.
As regards the first ground the High Court held and rightly so that it is too late in the day to contend that the allotments to the respondent made in June, 1959 were invalid. The fact that the respondents were held to be Jammu & Kashmir refugees being established, the settlement authorities on that account held them entitled to hold on to the entitlements. The High Court could not disturb the restoration of the allotment. There is no merit the petition and leave to appeal is refused.
M, Z, M,
Leave refused.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer