Case Details

Citation(s)
2026 SLG 4128 = 2026 SLD 4128
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No.15267 of 2025.
Presented By: (AHMAD NADEEM ARSHAD) JUDGE
18.12.2025 Sh. Jamshed Hayat, Advocate for the petitioner. Kanwar Sajid Ali, Assistant Advocate General Punjab. Rana Shakeel Ahmad, Advocate for respondent No.5. (On Watching Brief).

Ghulam Jilani Aftab.

VERSUS

Government of the Punjab, etc.

Law: Constitution of Pakistan 1973

Section: 199

Case Summary

Tagline

The Dispute Resolution Committee (DRC) has no authority to evict or dispossess any person; only the Tribunal can pass enforceable orders regarding possession under the Punjab Protection of Ownership of Immoveable Property Ordinance, 2025.

Facts

  • The petitioner filed a constitutional petition under Article 199 of the Constitution challenging the constitutional validity of Sections 8(4), 8(5), and 16(1) of the Punjab Protection of Ownership of Immoveable Property Ordinance, 2025.
  • During arguments, the petitioner abandoned the constitutional challenge and only sought protection against the alleged verbal directions of the Additional Deputy Commissioner (Revenue)/DRC to vacate the disputed property.
  • Respondent No.5 had already initiated an ejectment petition regarding the same property, which remained pending after remand by the appellate court.
  • Respondent No.5 simultaneously filed a complaint before the DRC under Section 7 of the Ordinance.

Issues

  1. Whether the DRC has the authority to order eviction or restoration of possession.
  2. Whether the DRC can take coercive measures before the Tribunal decides the matter.
  3. Scope of preventive powers under Section 9 of the Ordinance.

Held

The High Court held that:

  • The DRC is only a fact-finding, conciliatory, and recommendatory body.
  • It cannot order eviction, dispossession, restoration of possession, or enforce possession.
  • Such powers exclusively vest in the Tribunal under Sections 16 and 17 of the Ordinance.
  • Any preventive action under Section 9 must:
    • be based on a formal application,
    • follow notice and hearing,
    • be passed through a reasoned written order,
    • remain temporary and preventive only,
    • not conflict with any subsisting court order.

Court's Reasoning

The Court interpreted the Ordinance as follows:

🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register