| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2015 SLG 2443 2015 SLD 2443 2015 PLD 344 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeals Nos. 19 and 20 of 2009, decided on 13th April, 2015.
ANWAR ZAHEER, JAMALI, DOST MUHAMMAD KHAN AND UMAR ATA BANDIAL, JJ
Sardar Muhammad Aslam, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellants (in both appeals). Nemo for
Respondents Nos. 1-3, 5 and 6 (in C.A. No. 19 of 2009). Muhammad Asif Chaudhary, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondents Nos.16, 20-22 (in C.A.No. 20 of 2009).
Civil Appeals Nos. 19 and 20 of 2009, decided on 13th April, 2015.
ANWAR ZAHEER, JAMALI, DOST MUHAMMAD KHAN AND UMAR ATA BANDIAL, JJ
Sardar Muhammad Aslam, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellants (in both appeals). Nemo for
Respondents Nos. 1-3, 5 and 6 (in C.A. No. 19 of 2009). Muhammad Asif Chaudhary, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondents Nos.16, 20-22 (in C.A.No. 20 of 2009).
WAPDA and others
VS
BASHIR HUSSAIN SHAH and another
Law:
Section:
Land Acquisition Act (1 of 1894)--- ----Ss. 18(3)(4), 22-A, 50(2), proviso & 54-Constitution of Pakistan, Art.203-D(3)(b)---Appeal against award---Right of Federal Government or beneficiary of acquired land to file appeal---Scope---Necessary parties to the appeal---Appeals filed by Land Acquisition Collector and Provincial Government (beneficiary of the acquisition) were dismissed by the High Court on the grounds that beneficiaries of acquisition were not necessary parties as per the Land Acquisition Act, 1894---Legality---Provisions of Ss.18(3)(4), 22-A, 50(2) & 54 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, barring right of appeal to Government/beneficiary (of the acquisition) had been declared as repugnant to Injunctions of Islam by Shariat Appellate Bench of Supreme Court vide dated 18-2-1991 in Shariat Appeal No.7/89, after fixing a cut-off date till 30-9-1991, for making therein necessary amendments by competent bodies---According to Art.203-D(3)(b) of the Constitution, any law or its provision declared by Shariat Appellate Court as repugnant to Injunctions of Islam would cease to have effect on date on which its decision would take effect---Government/beneficiaries (of acquisition) after expiry of such cut-off date would have right to an appeal---Impugned of High Court was set aside and case was remanded to the High Court for hearing afresh, after affording due opportunity of hearing to all the concerned parties---Appeal was allowed accordingly. Land Acquisition Collector v. Muhammad Nawaz PLD 2010 SC 745 ref. JUDGMENT ANWAR ZAHEER JAMALI, J.---These two appeals arise out of the common judgment dated 27-10-2008, passed by a learned Division Bench of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, Rawalpindi, in R.F.As Nos:70 of 2006 and 71 of 2006, filed by the appellants, whereby to the extent of appellants Nos.1, 2 and 4 these appeals were dismissed being incompetent and for the remaining appellant No.3, they were dismissed, being devoid of merit. 2. Briefly stated, relevant facts of the case are that for the benefit of appellants Nos.1 and 2 (WAPDA), an area of 301.03 kanals, situated at village Badana Khurd, Tehsil Taxila, District Islamabad was acquired by…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492