Find a Lawyer

Constitutional Petition No. S‑111 of 1980, decided on 9th April 1986.

‑‑‑S. 2(2)‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199 Constitutional jurisdiction, exercise of‑‑Proceedings taken under repealed Act after coming into force of Act XIV of 1975‑‑Effect‑‑No proceedings, held, could be taken by any of Settlement Authorities under provisions of repealed Acts after coming into effect of Act XIV of 1975‑‑Only those proceedings were saved which were pending immediately before repeal‑ Only those cases could be decided by Authorized Officer which were remanded either by High Court or Supreme Court‑‑Where neither any proceedings were pending nor any proceedings were remanded back by High Court or Supreme Court after repeal of Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act, cognizance taken by Authority would be without jurisdiction‑‑Such unauthorized assumption of jurisdiction would justify interference by High Court in exercise of constitutional jurisdiction for setting aside order passed by such authority.

Muhammad Ali Shaikh for Petitioner.

Muhammad Ibrahim Memon, Addl. A.‑G. for Respondent No.1.

Nemo for Respondnets Nos.2 and 3 (absent).

Date of hearing: 9th April, 1986.

This petition under Article 199 of the Constitution is filed td, challenge the order of the Deputy Commissioner, dated 1st of April, 1979, cancelling the allotment of the petitioner in respect of agricultural land, bearing Surveys Nos. 411 and 413, situated in Deh Dogar, Taluka Khairpur Nathan Shah, District Dadu. ‑ The only contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner in this case is that the order, dated 1‑4‑1979, passed by respondent No.1, is wholly without jurisdiction, as, after the enforcement of Act XIV 1975 (Evacuee Property and Displaced Persons Law (Repeal) Act, 1979), which came into effect from 1st of July 1974, no proceedings could be taken by any of the Settlement Authorities under the provisions of the repealed Act. It is quite clear from a reading of the order of respondent No.1, dated 1st April, 1979, that he initiated the proceedings in his capacity as the Additional Settlement Commissioner on an application made to him by respondent No.2 on 3rd March, 1979, alleging duplicate transfer o land, bearing Surveys Nos. 411 and 413 of Deh Dogar, under the provisions of the Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act, 1958. After the repeal of the Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act, 1958, by Act XIV of 1975, only those proceedings were saved under subsection (2) of section 2 of the repealed Act, which were either pending immediately before the repeal, or, only those cases could be decided by an Authorised Officer appointed under the Act after the repeal of.. th.e Ordinance, which were remanded either by the High Court, or, Supreme Court. In the present case, neither any proceedings were pending, nor it was a case,' where the proceedings were remanded back by the High Court, or; the Supreme Court, after the repeal of the Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act. In these circumstances, the very cognizance taken by respondent No. 1, on the application of; respondent No.2, dated 3‑3‑1979, was wholly without jurisdiction, as, after 1‑7‑1979, he had no jurisdiction either to entertain or to decide any application under the provisions of the Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act, 1958. The learned Additional Advocate‑General, who appears for respondent No.1 in the case, also does not support the order of respondent No. 1, in view of the clear provisions contained in Act XIV of 1979. 1 accordingly accepted this petition, and declared the order, dated 1‑4‑1979, as an order without jurisdiction and lawful authority. There will, however, be no order as to costs.

A . A . Petition accepted.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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