| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2026 SLG 800 2026 SLD 800 = 2026 LHC 1747 |
Lahore High Court
W.P.No.428 of 2021
Presented By: (Mirza Viqas Rauf) JUDGE
Date of hearing: 10.03.2026 Petitioners by: Ch. Imran Hassan Ali, Advocate.
Respondent No.1 by: Ms. Rahat Farooq Raja, Assistant Advocate General Punjab and Mr. Muhammad Zafar- ul-Hassan Joya, Advocate/Legal Advisor.
Respondents No.3(B), 4 and 5 by: Mr. Arshad Majeed Malik, Advocate.
Respondents No.2(A) to 2(L), 3(A) and 3(C) to 3(G) are ex-parte.
W.P.No.428 of 2021
Presented By: (Mirza Viqas Rauf) JUDGE
Date of hearing: 10.03.2026 Petitioners by: Ch. Imran Hassan Ali, Advocate.
Respondent No.1 by: Ms. Rahat Farooq Raja, Assistant Advocate General Punjab and Mr. Muhammad Zafar- ul-Hassan Joya, Advocate/Legal Advisor.
Respondents No.3(B), 4 and 5 by: Mr. Arshad Majeed Malik, Advocate.
Respondents No.2(A) to 2(L), 3(A) and 3(C) to 3(G) are ex-parte.
BEGUM JAN, ETC.
VERSUS
. MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE/CHIEF SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER/ADMINISTRATOR (RESIDUAL PROPERTIES)/ NOTIFIED OFFICER, PUNJAB, ETC.
Law: Antiquities Act, 1975
Section: 3
Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984
Section: 115
Tag Line: After repeal of evacuee laws, settlement authorities have no jurisdiction to reopen finalized allotments, and any such action is void ab initio. Case Summary This constitutional petition under Article 199 of the Constitution challenged an order dated 19.03.2019, whereby: The allotment of evacuee land in favour of the petitioner (made in 1978) was cancelled, and Part of the land was directed to be transferred to tenants (respondents) under Section 3 of the Evacuee Property and Displaced Persons Laws (Repeal) Act, 1975. Key Legal Issues Whether tenants had locus standi to challenge allotment. Whether respondent No.1 (Chief Settlement Commissioner) had jurisdiction after repeal of evacuee laws. Whether a 35-year-old allotment could be reopened. Whether allegations of fraud could be decided in such proceedings. Applicability of Section 3 of Act, 1975 to respondents. 🧾 Court’s Findings 1. Lack of Jurisdiction (Core Issue) After enactment of the Act, 1975, the entire Settlement Department (including Chief Settlement Commissioner) ceased to exist. Only Notified Officers could decide: Pending cases at the time of repeal, not fresh applications. The case was not pending, but initiated in 2014, decades after repeal. 👉 Therefore: The authority exercised was without lawful jurisdiction (coram non judice). 2. Doctrine of Past and Closed Transactions Allotment was made in 1978 and remained unchallenged for 35 years. Such transactions attain finality and cannot be reopened casually. 3. Estoppel Against Tenants Under Article 115 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984: A tenant cannot deny the title of landlord. Respondents, being tenants, were barred from challenging allotment. 4. Laches (Delay) Challenge after 35 years was: Grossly delayed Hit by doctrine of laches 5. Misapplication of Section 3 of Act, 1975 Section 3 applies only to: Property available for disposal under statutory scheme. Respondents: Did not fulfill criteria Could not seek transfer merely based on possession. 6. Special Status of Jammu & Kashmir Refugee Land Land allotted to Jammu & Kashmir refugees: Falls under a special regime Outside jurisdiction of settlement authorities 7.…