Find a Lawyer

Constitutional Petition No. S‑73 of 1983, heard on 30th October, 1986.

‑‑‑S. 10/11‑‑Evacuee Property and Displaced Persons Laws (Repeal) Act (XIV of 1975), S. 2‑‑Evacuee property‑‑Cancellation of site plan approved by Settlement Commissioner‑‑Petitioners were allotted plot for which a building plan was approved by Deputy Settlement Commissioner after repeal of Act XXVIII of 1958‑‑On a report from Anti‑Corruption Establishment Site plan of petitioner cancelled by Board of revenue also after repeal of Act XXVIII of 1958‑‑Orders of cancellation of plan as well as of approval of building plan, held, were passed without lawful authority‑‑Petition was allowed to be withdrawn with permission to seek other remedy according to law.

Ahmad Yousuf Ali Rizvi for Petitioner.

Nemo for Respondents.

Date of hearing:30th October, 1986.

Perusal of the record shows that the petitioner was transferred the property bearing No. SOL‑B1/7‑B, Soldier Bazar, Karachi (VII‑E‑2) owned by one Lachman Das and the P.T.D. was issued on or about 27‑12‑1967. It appears that subsequently after the repeal of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958 by Act No. XIV of 1975 which came into effect from Ist July, 1974, the petitioner submitted plan prepared by an architect to the respondent No. 2/Deputy Settlement Commissioner Karachi for his inspection of site and approval. Case of the petitioner is that the said respondent No.2 inspected the site, verified the plan its measurements and having found the same correct and genuine approved the same by making endorsement reproduced below:‑

"Property No. SOL‑B‑1/7‑8 VII‑E‑2 transferred to Mr. Amir Muhammad Khan. Inspected the site the area market in Red as A, B, C, D, E, F, G & H is according to the premises. Therefore, the same is hereby verified.

( S d.)

Deputy Settlement Commissioner,

Karachi. 19‑5‑1976."

The case of the petitioner is that in accordance with the said approved plan he constructed a building on the plot and that no one raised any objection to the same.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that after a lapse of almost 7 years, he received letter No. D . S . C . / Kar. / 83 / 222 , dated 18th May, 1983 informing him as follows:

No. D.S.C./Kar./83‑222, Dated, the 18th May, 1983

To,

Mr. Amir Muhammad Khan,

s/o Khushal Khan,

No Soldier Bazar‑1‑7 & 8,

Verly Road, Karachi.

Sub Property No. SOL. B1‑7 & 8, Soldier Bazar, Karachi.

Whereas from the communication received from S.P.,Anfi,Corruption Establishment, Karachi it has come to light that you go the site plan of plot Nos. Sol. B1. 7 & 8 vertified by misrepresentation for 21 sq. yards and 240 sq. yards.

And whereas you were called upon vide this office letter No. DSC/Kar./83/185, dated 25‑4‑1983 to submit the P.T.D. and plan in respect of the above , property for deletion of excess area which you had got verified fraudulently:

And whereas you have failed to appear and submit the said documents before the undersigned for necessary correction therein within the specified period mentioned in the said notice.

"Therefore, the disputed plan verified by this office on 19‑5‑1976 is hereby treated as cancelled.

S. A. Sajjad Haider,

Deputy Settlement Commissioner (Karachi).

Copy forwarded with compliments to the S.P. Anti‑Corruption Establishment Karachi, with reference to his letter No. SP/ACE/ KAR/2278‑79 of 1983, dated 3‑4‑1983 for information.

S.A. Sajjad Haider,

Deputy Settlement Commissioner (Karachi)."

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has challenged the directions/orders communicated in the aforementioned letter on 18th May, 1983 by filing this petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Pakistan.

4. The learned counsel at the hearing in support of the petition urged the following grounds:‑

(i) That the impugned order passed on 18‑5‑1983 cancelling the approved plan verified by the respondent No. 2 on 19th May, 1976 was passed without giving any show‑cause notice or opportunity of being heard to the petitioner.

(ii) That the impugned order was passed after the repeal of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958 by Act No. XIV of 1975 and thus, the same is liable to be quashed as having been made without any lawful authority.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and find myself 'in agreement with him that the respondent No. 2 after the repeal of Displaced Persons Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958 by Act No. XV of 1975 which came into effect from 1‑7‑1974 had no jurisdiction to pass the impugned order dated 18‑5‑1983 cancelling the plan approved on 19‑5‑1976.

This however does not put an end to the matter as for the same reason as recorded above I also find that the action of the Deputy Settlement Commissioner giving approval to the building plan on 19‑5‑1976 at the instance of the petitioner was itself an act which was without lawful authority in view of the provisions of Act No. XIV of 1975 (Evacuee Property and Displaced Persons Law (Repeal) Act 1975).

The petitioner in the circumstances discussed above on the basis of the approval given by the Deputy Settlement Commissioner on 19‑5‑1976, which approval itself has been found to have been given without any lawful authority cannot seek any of the reliefs claimed in the petition.

6. At this stage Mr. Rizvi, the learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that in view of the above observations, he may be allowed to withdraw this petition with permission to seek other remedy according to law.

. The petition is allowed to be withdrawn and leave is reserved to the petitioner as required.

Petition in the circumstances stands disposed of

M.Y.H./5154/K Petition allowed

Find a Lawyer Near You

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