Case Details

Citation(s)
1992 SLD 768 = 1992 CLC 395
Peshawar High Court
Writ Petition No.1 of 1991, decided on 10th September, 1991.
Presented By: Before Raza Ahmad Khan and Mehbub Ali Khan, JJ
Shabir Shah for Petitioner. M. Ayub for
Respondents Nos. 1 and 2. Abdullah Jan Mirza for
Respondent No.3. Ghulam Mustafa for
Respondent No.4

KHAN BAHADUR--Petitioner

VERSUS

DEPUTY        COMMISSIONER,        DISTRICT                         KOHISTAN                    and                      3 others--Respondents

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 199

  Domicile-- ----Educational institution---Domicile certificate originally issued to petitioner was duly enquired into, after verification of concerned Tehsildar, based on the evidence of Chairman arid members of more than one Union Councils  Status of petitioner as also that of his father being. originally domicile of concerned district could not be disputed---Petitioner's father having shifted his residence to Gilgit and doing his business there, by itself would not be sufficient to indicate that he had abandoned his domicile of origin, more particularly when he was still holding his ancestral property therein. in token of his adherence thereto  Subsequent enquiry report and cancellation of domicile certificate being misconceived proceeded on wrong direction---Order of cancellation of petitioner's domicile was. thus, not sustainable. Natural justice, principles of-- ---- Cancellation of domicile certificate without show-cause notice ---Effect-- Domicile certificate although issued administratively, yet would create a right in holder thereof  Cancellation of such certificate as a result of enquiry in which petitioner was not associated, would prima facie, appear to be against the principles of natural justice and could not be countenanced with favour.--[Domicile] Where a person or body of persons, was empowered to take any decision after ex post facto enquiry/investigation into certain facts which would result in consequences affecting a vested right of another person; then the Courts of law were generally inclined to imply that the power so given was coupled with the duty, cast upon such person or body of persons, to act in accordance with such principles of natural justice as would be applicable in the facts and circumstances of a given case.   Enquiry into authenticity of the domicile certificate earlier issued to the petitioner, till the passing of the impugned order whereby the petitioner was deprived of his vested rights by cancelling the said certificate; was violative .of the principles of natural justice as embodied in age old maxim "Audi alteram pertem" that is to say no one should be condemned unheard.…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register