| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1963 SLG 3626 = 1963 SLD 3626 = 1963 PLD 726 |
Sindh High Court
Writ Petition No. 140 of 1961, decided on 25th March 1963.
Presented By: Masud Ahmad, J
Fazal Mahmood and A. Majeed for Petitioner. M. A. Rahim, Hafiz Sultan Ahmed and Iqbalur Rahim for
Respondents. Dates of hearing: 4th, 5th and 11th March 1963.
Writ Petition No. 140 of 1961, decided on 25th March 1963.
Presented By: Masud Ahmad, J
Fazal Mahmood and A. Majeed for Petitioner. M. A. Rahim, Hafiz Sultan Ahmed and Iqbalur Rahim for
Respondents. Dates of hearing: 4th, 5th and 11th March 1963.
Mst. JEHAN ARA BEGUM-Petitioner
VERSUS
THE CHIEF SETTLEMENT AND REHABILITATION COMMISSIONER,PAKISTAN, THE SETTLEMENT AND REHABILITATION COMMISSIONER, KARACHI Hakim MUHAMMAD ISHAQUE Mst. EJAZ BEGUM, AND (5) S. IRSHAD HUSS AIN-Respondents
Law: Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958
Section:
(a) Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIll of 1958), S. 2 (4)-Power of Chief Settlement Commis sioner to declare a building divisible-Power delegated t9 Deputy Settlement Commissioner - Deputy Settlement Commissioner exercises delegated power even if he holds building to be indivisible --Revision by Settlement Commissioner of order passed by Deputy Settlement Commissioner holding building to be indivisible not competent. In accordance with the provisions of clause (4) of section 2 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958, if a building or premises consists of more residential units than one and if such units are in possession of several persons, the whole of such building or premises shall be deemed to be a house, unless the Chief Settlement Commissioner orders otherwise. Where the officer concerned has applied his mind to the question as to whether the property is divisible or not and if he comes to the conclusion that it is not divisible and transfers it as a single unit, it cannot be urged that in doing so he did not exercise the power delegated to him by the Chief Settlement Commissioner under subsection (4) of section 2 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958. As held by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Ch. Bahar Muhammad's case Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 58 of 1962, therefore, the Settlement and Rehabilitation Commissioner, could not have modified the order of the Deputy Settlement Commissioner, who had held that the property was indivisible and had transferred the whole of it to the petitioner. Ch. Bahar Muhammad's case Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 58 of 1962 ref. (b) Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958), S. 2(6) read with Sched. para. 1-Benefit of possession of one's parent, son, daughter or spouse can only be taken if there is no other applicant-Applicant for a portion only of building where building is held to be indivisible, not an "applicant" within expression "other applicant." A person can take benefit of the possession…