Lawyers Directory Listing
Unlock direct contact details for up to 10 lawyers so you can call or WhatsApp the right legal professional and move your matter forward with confidence.
Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 100‑P of 1985, decided on 26th October, 1986.
‑‑‑Arts. 185(3) & 203‑D‑‑Land Reforms Regulation, 1972 ((M.L.R.115), para. 25 (3) (d)‑‑North‑West Frontier Province Pre‑emption Act (XIV of 1950), S.12‑‑Punjab Pre‑emption Act (I of 1913), S. 15‑‑Pre‑emption‑ Preferential right of tenant‑‑Repugnancy to injunctions of Islam‑‑Supreme Court having declared that relevant provisions of Regulation (M L.R.115) were repugnant to injunctions of Islam and directing that necessary amendment in law be made with effect from 31‑7‑1986, leave to appeal granted to consider, inter alia, whether petitioner's rights under present law still subsisted and could not be taken away with retrospective effect.
P L D 1979 Pesh. 104 and N.‑W.F.P. v. Said Kamal Shah P L D 1986 SC 361 ref.
‑‑‑Arts. 185(3) & 203‑D‑‑Punjab Pre‑emption Act (I of 1913), S.15‑ North‑West Frontier Province Pre‑emption Act (XIV of 1950), S.12‑‑Pre emption‑‑Tenant's preferential rights‑‑Repugnancy to injunctions of Islam‑‑Leave to appeal granted to consider whether after Supreme Court's declaration that a particular provision of Regulation was repugnant to injunctions of Islam and direction having been issued to Government to make necessary amendment in Regulation, petitioner's rights under present law still subsisted and could not be taken away with retrospective effect.
P L D 1979 Pesh. 104 and N.W.F.P. v. Said Kamal Shah P L D 1986 SC 361 ref.
Abdur Rehman Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Jalaluddin Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing: 26th October, 1986.
This is a petition for leave to appeal from the judgment of a Division Bench of Peshawar High Court, dated 25‑3‑1985 allowing a writ petition filed by respondents 4 and 5 and in result setting aside the decree passed in petitioner's favour by the Collector in a pre‑emption suit. Petitioner's claim to preferential right was based on the ground that they were the tenants of the suit property which is recognised under clause (d) of paragraph 25(3) of Land Reforms Regulation, 1972.
The High Court reversed the judgment of the Courts below on basis of decision reported as P L D 1979 Pesh. 104 (Shariat Bench) wherein it was held that clause (d) of sub‑para. (3) of paragraph 25 of Land Reforms Regulation is repugnant to the spirit of Islam and a recommendation was made to the Government for the deletion of the aforesaid provision of law with immediate effect. This Court has also in "N.‑W.F.P. v. Said Kamal Shah P L D 1986 SC 361" ruled to the above effect but has directed that necessary amendment in the provisions of the Regulation may be made with effect from 31‑7‑1986.
Mr. Abdul Rehman Khan, learned counsel appearing in support of the petition submits that petitioner's rights under the present law still subsist and these cannot be taken away with retrospective effect.
This and other points raised in the petition deserve consideration. We therefore grant leave and allow the petition. Security Rs.1,000.
The appeal will be heard on the present record within six months. It will. however, open to the parties to fill additional documents, if any.
M.I. Leave granted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer