Case Details

Citation(s)
1981 SLG 1981 = 1981 SLD 3189 = 1981 SCMR 628
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 304 of 1976, decided on 25th March, 1981. (On appeal from judgment dated 2-2-1976 of the Lahore High Court in W. P. No. 882/R of 1970).
Presented By: Mushtaq Hussain and Fakhruddin G. Ebrahim, JJ
Ch. Ghazanfar Ali Gondal, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Wajid Huvsain, Advocate- on-Record for Petitioner. Inayat Hussain, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondents.

Sh. FAZAL KARIM-Petitioner

VERSUS

SETTLEMENT & RHABILITATION COMMISSIONER AND 3 OTHERS-- Respondents

Law: Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958)

Section: 2

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 185(3)

Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958) S. 2 read with Sebed., Part II and Settlement Scheme No. VII Order of Settlement Commissioner holding both shops as constituting one unit not shown to be erroneous-Order of transfer not passed, without jurisdiction-Order even if shown to be erroneous, property in dispute having been transferred in favour of respondent, nothing held, stood available for transfer in favour of petitioner under Settle ment Scheme No. VII-Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185 (3). Date of hearing : 22nd March, 1981;                                                                                                            ORDER FAKHRUDDIN G. EBRAHIM, J.-The petitioner, a local, was aggrieved by the fact that he had not been transferred a shop in his possession under Settlement Scheme No. VII, on the ground that the shop in his possession was part and parcel of the shop in possession of the claimant displaced person, respondent No. 4 as far back as 1963 and he had been issued Permanent Transfer Deed on 19-6-1.961, and it was three years later that the petitioner had sought its transfer. Before the High Court the petitioner's grievance was that respondent No. 4 who had sought the transfer of the shop in possession of the petitioner as part and parcel of the shop in his possession had lost before Ch. Nabi Ahmad, Settlement Commissioner, vide his order dated 10-10-1961, which order, though made by this officer, was not signed by him as be died in the meanwhile. It was alleged that respondent No. 4 manoeuvred to have the revision heard again by the successor Settlement…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register