Case Details

Citation(s)
2001 SLD 286 = 2001 YLR 1032

Intra-Court Appeals Nos:262 to 280 and 337 to 353 of 1994, decided on 30th April, 2001.
Ch. Ijaz Ahmad and Mian Saqib Nisar, JJ

TOWN COMMITTEE, KOT ABDUL MALIK, DISTRICT SHEIKHUPURA through Administrator--- Appellant

VERSUS

PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through the Secretary, Local Government and Rural Development Department, Punjab, Lahore and another ---Respondents

Law:

Section:

We intend to decide the following I.C.As. by one consolidated judgment having similar facts and law and this order will govern the following I.C.As.:   I.C.As. Nos.262 to 280 and 337 to 353 of 1994.   Brief facts out of which the aforesaid I.C.As. arise are that private respondents in the aforesaid I.C.As. filed writ petitions with the following prayers:   "It is, therefore, humbly prayed that this writ petition be allowed, the notifications, dated 25-10-1992 be declared to be without any lawful authority and of no legal effect.   It is further prayed that a declaration be granted to the effect that Town Committee, Kot Abdul Malik (respondent No.2) has ceased to exist and is no more a legal entity, accordingly it has no jurisdiction or authority in law to recover any kind of taxes. Moreover, a direction be issued to respondent No.2 to refund the amount of taxes already recovered by it from the petitioner. Costs be also awarded."   All the writ petitions were accepted by the learned Single Judge vide impugned judgment, dated 22-2-1994. Town Committee Kot Abdul Malik and Provincial Government being aggrieved filed aforesaid I.C.As. alongwith applications for condonation of delay for tiling the belated aforesaid I.C.As.   Learned counsel for the appellants submits that Notifications, dated 25-10-1995 published in the Punjab Gazette, dated 4-11-1992 were neither sent for publication nor they were signed by the competent Officer of the Government. These notifications so published were not signed and a such, the Superintendent Printing Press had no authority to publish the same in the Government Gazette without first ascertaining as to whether these were issued by the competent Authority. He further submits that the aforesaid plea was raised in the comments submitted by the Secretary/respondent No.2 in the W. P. No. 11969 of 1992 out of which these I.C.As. have been arisen. He further submits that this aspect was not noted by the learned Single Judge but on the contrary made the following observations:   "It was not disputed that the two notifications in questions had been issued by the Government but it was pleaded…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register