Find a Lawyer

Constitutional Petition No. 572 of 1984, decided on 23rd June, 1985.

Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑

‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958), S. 10‑‑Transfer of evacuee house cancelled in 1972‑ Order dismissing appeal in 1973 having not been challenged at any stage, became final‑‑Application for transfer of said house filed in 1976, held, incompetent because no proceedings were pending when Act (XXVIII of 1958) stood repealed on 1‑7‑1974‑‑Such view taken by High Court being unexceptionable petition for leave to appeal dismissed.

S.M. Abbas, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondents Nos. 1 to 3.

M.G. Dastgir, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents

Date of hearing: 23rd June, 1985.

.‑This is a petition for leave to Appeal from the judgment of a learned Judge of Sind High Court dated 10‑10‑1984 by which he dismissed the Constitution Petition filed by petitioner by which she sought to challenge the order of the Settlement Commissioner dated 5th March 1976. By that order, learned Settlement Commissioner rejected petitioner's application dated 3‑2‑1976 by which she requested that the transfer of the disputed house bearing C.H. No.1368/1, Ward B, Larkana in favour of Minho Khan predecessor‑in‑interest of respondents 4 to 9 as the highest bidder at the open auction held on 25‑10‑1963 be cancelled. Petitioner's claim was based on the fact that she had purchased house bearing C.H.No.1368/5, Ward B, Larkana in an open auction held on 21‑9‑1964 which, according to her, bore C.H No. 1368/1, Ward B, Larkana. Learned Settlement Commissioner rejected petitioner's application on the ground that the transfer of house bearing No.C.H.1368/5 was cancelled by the Deputy Settlement Commissioner on 5‑12‑1972 and the petitioner's appeal against this order had also been dismissed by the Additional Settlement Commissioner by the order dated 16‑2‑1973, and since the order of the Additional Settlement Commissioner dismissing petitioner's appeal was not challenged by the petitioner at any stage, her subsequent application dated 3‑2‑1976 was incompetent as by then 'the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 1958 stood repealed with effect from 1‑7‑1974. Learned Judge ir, the High Court also rejected petitioner's claim for the same reasons that "the order dated 6‑2‑1973 (passed by the Additional Settlement Commissioner) thus became final and there was no proceedings pending before the Settlement Authorities on 1‑7‑1974 when the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act 1958 stood repealed. In view of this legal position, the learned Settlement Commissioner was justified in refusing to reopen the case on the Miscellaneous Application filed by the petitioner on 3‑2‑1976."

After having heard the learned counsel, we do not see how any exception can be taken with the view that has prevailed with the learned Judge in the High Court. The petition is accordingly dismissed.

M. I. 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.