| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2024 SLG 5784 2024 SLD 5784 = 2024 CLC 1495 |
Balochistan High Court
C.Ps. Nos.1128, 1129 and 1130 of 2022, decided on 4th March, 2024.
Before Abdullah Baloch and Muhammad Aamir Nawaz Rana, JJ
Muhammad Riaz Ahmed for Petitioners. Nusrat Baloch, Additional Advocate General assisted by Aftab Qadir Mughal, Law Officer, Mines and Minerals Department, Government of Balochistan for
Respondents Nos.1 and 2. Talaat Waheed Khan for
Respondent No.3. Tahir Ali Baloch and Syed Saaduddin Shah along with Attorney Malik Masood Khan for
Respondents Nos.4 to 9. Syed Ayaz Zahoor for
Respondents Nos.10, 11 and 13. Noor Ahmed Kakar for
Respondent No.12.
C.Ps. Nos.1128, 1129 and 1130 of 2022, decided on 4th March, 2024.
Before Abdullah Baloch and Muhammad Aamir Nawaz Rana, JJ
Muhammad Riaz Ahmed for Petitioners. Nusrat Baloch, Additional Advocate General assisted by Aftab Qadir Mughal, Law Officer, Mines and Minerals Department, Government of Balochistan for
Respondents Nos.1 and 2. Talaat Waheed Khan for
Respondent No.3. Tahir Ali Baloch and Syed Saaduddin Shah along with Attorney Malik Masood Khan for
Respondents Nos.4 to 9. Syed Ayaz Zahoor for
Respondents Nos.10, 11 and 13. Noor Ahmed Kakar for
Respondent No.12.
Messrs KURDISH MINING ENTERPRISES through Adnan Aziz Kurd and others----Petitioners
VERSUS
SECRETARY MINES AND MINERAL, GOVERNMENT OF BALOCHISTAN, QUETTA and 12 others----Respondents
Law: Balochistan Mineral Rules, 2002
Section: 90
Balochistan Mineral Rules, 2002--- ----R. 90---Mining lease holder---Restoration of lease---Un-worked / un-utilized area---Scope---Condemned unheard---Lease in question was in favour of respondents which was cancelled under R. 90 of Balochistan Mineral Rules, 2002 by the authorities and was allotted to petitioners---Provincial Government set aside the lease cancelling order and restored it in favour of respondents---Validity--Before taking action under R.90 of Balochistan Mineral Rules, 2002, against mining lease holder on the ground of keeping mining area idle for years, opportunity had to be provided to mining lease holder to explain his position--Authorities illegally cancelled lease of respondent and allotted the same to petitioners---High Court declined to interfere in the notification passed by Provincial Government in exercise of appellate jurisdiction restoring lease of respondents---Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances. Date of hearing: 4th December, 2023. JUDGMENT MUHAMMAD AAMIR NAWAZ RANA, J.---By this common judgment, we intend disposing of the above captioned constitution petitions as identical questions of facts and law are involved in these petitions. 2. The chequered history of litigation between the parties reveals that an arbitration award dated 01.02.1977 was passed with regard to certain movable and immoveable properties of the family and of the family businesses of late Malik Mir Hassan Khan. The arbitration award was made rule of Court by the High Court of Sindh vide order dated 07.11.1979, passed in suit No.378 of 1979, and subsequently decree was prepared on 08.06.1985. Thereafter, respondent No.3 (Malik Mustafa) filed a suit before High Court of Sindh and sought partition and possession regarding the legacy left by his father late Malik Mir Hassan Khan. Record divulges that vide order dated 23.02.2004, the parties to the suit were restrained from creating third party interest in the suit property till decision of the suit. Record further divulges that despite pendency of litigation with regard to mining leases of family of respondents Nos.3 to 13, the respondent No.2 i.e. the Director General ('DG'), Mines and…