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 Petitidn No. 855‑R of 1978, heard on 5th February 1986.
‑‑‑Art. 199‑‑Displaced Persons (Land Settlement). Act (XLVII of 1958), Ss. 10 6 11‑‑Evacuee Property and Displaced Persons Laws (Repeal) Act (XIV of 1975), S. 2‑‑Allotment of land‑‑Case finalised and consigned to record‑‑Re‑opening of‑‑Jurisdiction of Settlement Authority‑ Settlement Authority after scrutinizing allotment of disputed land in favour of allottees /petitioners finally disposed of matter and consigned case to record room‑‑Settlement Authority, held, had no jurisdiction to re‑open matter and summon allottees after considerable period of time particularly when Evacuee Laws had already been repealed‑‑Order of Settlement Authority was declared to have been passed without lawful authority and of no legal effect.
Ch. Muhammad Abdullah for Petitioners.
Ch. Muhammad Nazir Ahmad for Respondent No. 1.
Nemo for the Remaining Respondents.
Date of hearing: 5th February 1986.
Through thig Constitutional Petition Muhammad Hussain and two others, the petitioners want this Court to declare the order dated 20‑6‑1978 of Additional Settlement Commissioner (Lands), Guiranwala, respondent No.l, to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect.
2. The facts giving rise to this petition, briefly, are ‑that the petitioners are claimant displaced persons. Their claim was verified for 5880 P.I. Units. Out of this claim, the petitioners got 4000 P.I. Units transferred to Gujranwala District and secured 2,432 Kanals and 7 Marlas of land in village, Dharam Kot, Chak Rajada, Uncha Clare and Mehr Ali, Tehsil Wazirabad with a Beshi equal to 45 P.I. Units, on different dates. It so happened that the Inspection Team appointed for the verification of allotments investigated into the aforsaid allotments in favour of the petitioners and submitted its report upon which proceedings under sections 10 and 11 of the Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act, 1958 were initiated against the petitioners. After having made thorough inquiry, the Additional Settlement/ Chief Settlement Commissioner vide his order, dated 22‑11‑1973 dropped further action in 'the matter and the case was accordingly consigned to the record room. After about 5 years of the dropping of the proceedings against the petitioners, the Additional Settlement Commissioner re‑opened the matter and has summoned the petitioners vide impugned order, dated 20‑6‑1978, hence, this petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the allotment in favour of the petitioners having been scrutinized under sections, 10 and 11 of Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act, 1958 anal having been disposed of finally and the case consigned to the record room on 22‑11‑1973, the learned Additional Settlement Commissioner had no jurisdiction to re70pen the matter and summon the petitioner. The learned counsel for Settlement Department has, however, supported the impugned order.
4. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel e. I feel persuaded to agree with the learned. I find that after the report of the Inspection the disputed land in favour of the petitioners Additional Settlement Commissioner who vide order, dated 22‑1‑1‑1973 disposed of the matter consigning the case t the record room and as such, the Additional Settlement Commissioned was not competent to re‑open the matter after about 5 years i.e. 20‑6‑1978 when the Evacuee Laws had already been repealed.
5. For what has been said above, the impugned order is declared to have been passed without lawful authority and of no legal effect. The parties are left to bear their own costs.
H. B. T. Petition allowed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer