Case Details

Citation(s)
1980 SLG 3249 = 1980 SLD 3249 = 1980 CLC 1644
Azad J. & K
Writ Petition under section 44 of the Azad J & K Interim Constitution Act, 1974, decided on 5th November, 1975.
Presented By: Kh. Muhammad Yusuf Saraf, C. J. and Sardar Muhammad Sharif Khan, J
Kh. Andr-ud-Din for Petitioners. Nemo for
Respondents Nos. 1 to 3.
Respondent No. 4 in person.

ABDUL AZIZ AND ANOTHER-Petitioners

VERSUS

AZAD GOVERNMENT OF J & K AND OT HBRs-Respondents

Law: Pakistan Rehabilitation Ordinance, (XLII of 1956)

Section: 12

(a) Pakistan Rehabilitation Act (XLII of 1956) S. 12-Custodian-Not an allotting authority-Forum of allot ment of evacuee property-Rehabilitation Department-Person aggrieved by order of allotment, confirmation of allotment or cancellation of allotment-Can seek remedy by way of revision before Custodian and Custodian to act within bounds and not go beyond limits prescribed by law-Custodian coming to conclusion that allotment not made by a competent authority on Rehabilita tion side-Held, ceased lawfully to proceed further. (b) Pakistan Rehabilitation Act (XGII of 1956) S. 12 and Council Order No. 25/60-Revision-Power of Custo dian not to probe into question of entitlement of allotment-Custo dian coming to conclusion that no allotment of land made in favour of petitioner---Jurisdiction of Custodian, held, exhausted and ceased lawfully to proceed further and probe into question of entitlement of allotment-Any further consideration on such question, would be in excess of jurisdiction and act beyond scope of authority-Order made by competent authority subject to revision-No such order existing-Revision, held, not maintainable.-[Revision (civil)].                                                                                                                                 JUDGMENT SARDAR MUHAMMAD JHARIF KHAN, J.-This writ petition is brought to this Court under section 44 of the Azad Jammu & Kashmir Interim Constitution Act, 1974 challenging the validity of the order of the learned Custodian dated 13th October, 1971 whereby it was held that the land in dispute had not been allotted to the petitioners by any of the Rehabilitation authorities. It was alleged by the non-petitioners in the revision petition before the Custodian that the land in dispute as a matter of fact was not allotted to the petitioners but they still claimed its allotment. Prior to…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register