| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2017 SLG 2811 2017 SLD 2811 2017 PLD 105 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeals No. 1023, 1024, 1357, 1358 and 2155 of 2016,decision Dated: 17-01-2017. Dates of hearing: 22 and23-11-2016. (Against the judgment Dated 19-1-2016 of thePeshawar High Court, Peshawar passed in Writ Petitions Nos.2485-P and 506-A/2014).
MIAN SAQIB NISAR, JUSTICE FAISAL ARAB, JUSTICE IJAZ UL AHSAN, JUSTICE
PETITIONER(S) BY: Aitzaz Ahsan, Senior Advocate Supreme Court (in C.As. Nos.1023 and 1024 of 2016).Sardar Abdul Raziq Khan, Advocate Supreme Court (in C.As. Nos.1357 and 1358 of 2016).RESPONDENT(S) BY:Arshad Zaman Kayani, Advocate Supreme Court, C
Civil Appeals No. 1023, 1024, 1357, 1358 and 2155 of 2016,decision Dated: 17-01-2017. Dates of hearing: 22 and23-11-2016. (Against the judgment Dated 19-1-2016 of thePeshawar High Court, Peshawar passed in Writ Petitions Nos.2485-P and 506-A/2014).
MIAN SAQIB NISAR, JUSTICE FAISAL ARAB, JUSTICE IJAZ UL AHSAN, JUSTICE
PETITIONER(S) BY: Aitzaz Ahsan, Senior Advocate Supreme Court (in C.As. Nos.1023 and 1024 of 2016).Sardar Abdul Raziq Khan, Advocate Supreme Court (in C.As. Nos.1357 and 1358 of 2016).RESPONDENT(S) BY:Arshad Zaman Kayani, Advocate Supreme Court, C
ABDUL HAQ KHAN AND OTHERSVSHAJI AMEERZADA AND OTHERS
Law: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Districts (Reconstitution) Ordinance (XXXII of 1960)
Section: 3
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 246(b)(i)
Law: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Land Revenue Act, (XVII of 1967)
Section: 6
(a) Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Districts (Reconstitution) Ordinance (XXXII of 1960)-------S. 3---Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967), S.6---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.246(b)(i)---Whether reconstitution of districts in the Provincially Administered Tribal Area (PATA) of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK) province was violative of the provisions of Art.246(b)(i) of the Constitution---Creation or variation of the limits of a district was not governed by the Constitution, but by the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Land Revenue Act, 1967---No bar existed in the Constitution which prevented the limits of districts, whether in relation to a Provincially Administered Tribal Areas or not, from being changed without a constitutional amendment.Provincial Government carved out Kohistan (Lower) District from the existing Kohistan District, which was a Provincially Administered Tribal area. High Court found that Provincially Administered Tribal Areas (PATA) excluded from Kohistan District and included in the newly established Kohistan (Lower) District did not figure any where in Article 246 of the Constitution thus the same could not be regarded as territory forming part of PATA, and hence the impugned action of the Provincial Government had disturbed the constitutional status of the said area.Article 246(b) of the Constitution defined and described "Provincially Administered Tribal Areas" (PATA). Mention of particular names of certain districts or areas in Article 246(b) was only for the purposes of describing the geographical limits of PATA or to mark a certain area as a tribal area it was not the "district" mentioned in the said Article which had attained territorial sanctity, rather it was the area identified as PATA which had attained territorial sanctity.Creation or variation of the limits of a district was not governed by the Constitution, but by the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Land Revenue Act, 1967. There was no bar in the Constitution which prevented the limits or districts, whether in relation to a PATA or not, from being changed without a constitutional amendment. To impute such a bar into Article 246(b) of the Constitution would be to read into it something which was not there and…