| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1992 SLD 834 = 1992 CLC 1698 |
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No.7105 of 1991, decided on 26th August, 1991.
Presented By: Before Gul Zarin Kani, J
O.M. Saleem for Petitioner.
Writ Petition No.7105 of 1991, decided on 26th August, 1991.
Presented By: Before Gul Zarin Kani, J
O.M. Saleem for Petitioner.
Syed UMAR DARAZ SHAH---Petitioner
VERSUS
DIRECTOR, L.DA. and others---Respondents
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 199
Constitution of Pakistan (1973)--- ----Art. 199---Attempted dispossession of petitioner by respondent Authority-- Petitioner aggrieved by attempt for his dispossession, seeking Constitutional remedy---Competency---In a controversy, emanating from disputed -question of fact, civil suit was an effective alternate remedy---Each and every civil dispute could not be taken up for resolution in extraordinary jurisdiction by High Court for, to do so, would tantamount to bypassing ordinary legal remedies available in appropriate legal forums established by law---Petitioner failed to point out as to what were the compelling reasons for taking up the dispute for its decision in extraordinary jurisdiction of High Court and why was it not appropriate or possible for him to sue his opponent in Civil Court for getting the required relief---Civil suit being a proper, adequate alternate effective remedy interference in extraordinary jurisdiction was declined and petitioner was left to pursue his ordinary legal remedy at law. O.M. Saleem for Petitioner. ORDER Applicant is in occupation of a small piece of plot as tenant of Evacuee Trust Property Board and pays them rent. On the plot, the applicant is shown to have constructed a room or two and is residing there. The Lahore Development Authority attempted to dismantle the existing constructions and take forcible possession of the plot from the applicant. LDA laid their claim to the property in possession of the applicant. Aggrieved of the attempt for his dispossession, applicant had invoked the Constitutional jurisdiction of this Court. It is stated that the LDA has no authority to demolish the constructions on the plot and forcibly dispossess the applicant from it. 2. In a…