| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1981 SLG 3272 = 1981 SLD 3272 = 1981 SCMR 412 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 6-P of 1979, decided on 20th November, 1979.
Presented By: Muhammad Haleem and G. Safdar Shah, JJ
Muhammad Bilal, Advocate Supreme Court and M. Qasim Imam, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Petitioner.
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 6-P of 1979, decided on 20th November, 1979.
Presented By: Muhammad Haleem and G. Safdar Shah, JJ
Muhammad Bilal, Advocate Supreme Court and M. Qasim Imam, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Petitioner.
SARDAR AHMAD KHAN-Petitioner
VERSUS
ASLEE KHAN AND 7 OTHERS-Respondents
Law: Constitution of Pakistan 1973
Section: 199, 185(3)
Constitution of Pakistan (1973) Arts. 199 & 185(3)-Writ jurisdiction-Provincial Government having empowered Deputy Commissioner to deal with all disputes relating to land in former State of Chitral after merger of such State in Province, Deputy Commissioner, held, acted on behalf of Provincial Government and decision recorded by him not open to question in writ proceedings unless violation of some legal provision pointed out. Date of hearing : 20th November, 1979. ORDER G. SAFDAR SHAH, J.-This leave petition, which is directed against the judgment of the Peshawar High Court, dated 14-I1-1978, arises in the following circumstances. 2. In the year 1920, the Ruler of the former State of Chitral gave the land in dispute to the mother of the petitioner in lieu of her dower when she married the father of the petitioner, named Muhammad Nadir Shah Lai. The land in question was subsequently improved by Nadir Shah Lal and in that behalf the Ruler granted his approval vide his order dated 19-11-1920. In the year 1922, some dispute arose in connection with the widening of the watercourse, which used to irrigate the land of Nadir Shah Lal, and in that behalf the matter was referred by the Ruler to the Judicial Council of the State. After necessary enquiries having been made in the matter by the Judicial Council, it submitted its report to the Ruler who vide his order, dated 2-6-1922, decided the case in favour of Nadir Shah Lal. Subsequently another dispute was raised by the residents of the village in respect of the irrigation rights of Nadir Shah Lal, and so the dispute in question was referred by the Ruler to one Muhammad Akbar Hayat, a Member of the Judicial Council, who vide his report dated 27-7-1944 held in favour of Nadir Shah Lai, and the Ruler consequently accepted his…