Law: Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958

Section: 2

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1962

Section: 58

(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 24th October 1969, in Letters Patent Appeal No. 355 of 1969). (a) Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958), ----- ------S. 2(4) & Sched., Part I-Divisibility of house-No final decision given by Deputy Settlement Commissioner on divisibility of house-Settlement Commissioner has jurisdiction to consider question-Person transferred one portion cannot challenge transfer of other portion to another. (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 58(3)-Finding of fact-Cannot be agitated before Supreme Court. Date of hearing : 2nd February 1970. ORDER WAHIDUDDIN AHMAD, J.-The dispute between the parties is in respect of bungalow No. 36, Jail Road, Lahore. The petitioner, who is in possession of a portion of the said bungalow, applied for its transfer. Respondent No. 1, Mr. E. W. Randle, also applied for its transfer on N. C. H. Form and for the benefit of the School known as "Randle Primary School". On the 11th April 1960, the Deputy Settlement Commissioner transferred the entire bungalow to the petitioner. The appeal of respondent No. 1 against this order was dismissed by the Additional Settlement Commissioner on the 25th July 1960. The matter was then taken by respondent No. 1 in revision before the Settlement Commissioner, Lahore, who by order dated the 19th January 1963, accepted the revision and remanded the case to the Deputy "Set Commissioner, Lahore, for decision of the entitlement of the parties. This order was challenged in Writ Petition No. 61 3, R of 1963, which was dismissed by the High Court of Pakistan on the 11th November 1964. The petitioner's petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 27 of 1967 was dismissed on the 7th May 1965. The result was that the order of the Settlement Commissioner dated the 19th January 1963 remained in the field. After this first round of litigation, the matter came up before the Deputy Settlement Commissioner, who by order dated the 9th June 1965, made a report to the Additional Settlement Commis sioner expressing the view that the bungalow is divisible and recommended that the…