Find a Lawyer

ZIA-UR-RAHMAN versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB

Constitution of Pakistan 1973 Article 199 Withdrawal of Property and Homelessness Act (XIV of 1975), Section 2 (2) Amendment to the Law Ordinance (XII of 1972), Section 3 Qualifying and maintaining applicants on the same subject. Repeated constitutional petitions were filed in connection with. The first constitutional petition challenging the legality of PTD issuance on the basis of auction in favor of the respondents was rejected after withdrawal of the same petition and the third application was dismissed on the same. The third petition was also dismissed for the reason that the previous constitutional applications were withdrawn unconditionally by the applicant, the applicant did not seek permission to file fresh constitutional petition in connection with the same subject and he applied for a technical or Due to a formal defect, she did not give up what she had previously requested Did not challenge. The orders by which he was denied PK exchange should be considered on the basis of his CH form, the Rupert, Popplent point or application which was available to the applicant and was not taken in the earlier case or writ petition. In addition to the various petitions before the petition, it may have been refused or rejected. There was a period of litigation up to the High Court through a civil suit, such a petitioner cannot be allowed to drag through any constitutional petition on a valid transfer. The constitutional jurisdiction is arbitrary jurisdiction. This cannot be used in favor of the applicant with. Constitutional application rightfully rejected as constitutionally invalid property advocate from Jhang lawyer