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.
Writ Petition No. .1531 of 1979, decided on 17th November,1986.
‑‑‑Arts. 199 & 270 [as amended by Constitution (Eighth Amendment) Act (XVII I of 1985) ]‑‑Constitutional petition, competency of Martial Law Regulations and Orders and actions taken thereunder having been given constitutional protection from challenge before Courts under Art. 270 of Constitution of Pakistan [as amended by Eighth Amendment of Constitution], constitutional petition filed against orders passed on behalf of Martial Law Administrator, held, would not be competent and would be liable to be dismissed‑‑Certain powers having been reserved for Governors of Provinces to afford relief to deserving persons of specified types in Martial Law matters, petitioner was advised to have recourse to such administrative remedy in circumstances.
S.M. Tayyab for Petitioner.
Khalil Ramdey, Addl. A.‑G. for Respondents.
Date of hearing: 17th November, 1986.
This writ petition is based on the grievance that petitioner's grant under the tubewell sinking scheme was illegally resumed in pursuance of the powers exercised under Martial Law Order 14. The Martial Law Administrator Zone 'A' was impleaded as respondent No.4 to this writ petition.
2. The order impugned in this case was that of the Secretary (Colonies), Board of Revenue, Government of the Punjab. In view of the eighth amendment of the Constitution whereby Article 270 has been introduced, martial law regulations and orders and actions taken under y such regulations and orders have been given Constitutional protection A from challenge before the Court. In this view of the matter, I do not think that this writ petition would be competent before this Court and is liable to be dismissed. However, there is no denying the fact that the petitioner has installed at the site a tube‑well and has been cultivating land for the last over three decades. He has also so far paid 31,631.
3. Another feature which must be noted is that as a result of the Minister order, the petitioner took steps inasmuch as he withdrew his R.S A No. 216 of 1976 which was pending before the High Court. Thus, he also stands deprived of that remedy which was available to him under the law.
4. There are certain powers reserved for the Governors of the provinces to afford relief to deserving persons of the specified types it martial law matters. In these circumstances, it will be advisable for the petitioner to have recourse to this administrative remedy. It is quite possible that on examination of the petitioner's case, justice may be found to be on his side.
The writ petition, therfore, stands disposed of in the above light. There shall, however, be no order as to, costs.
H . B. T . Petition dismissed/ Order accordingly.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer