Case Details

Citation(s)
1982 SLG 574 1982 SLD 574 1982 SCMR 1001
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 254 of 1979, decision dated: 23rd December, 1980.(On appeal from the judgment of Lahore High Court dated 28-1-1979 in Writ Petition No. 704-R of 1971)
KARAM ELAHEE CHAUHAN AND ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, JJ
Saeed-ud-Din, Advocate Supreme Court and Rana Maqbool Ahmad Qadri, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Khalid Mahmood and FazliHussain, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondent No. 1.

ILAM DIN

VS

MIRZA MUBARIK ALI AND 2 OTHERS

Law:

Section:

Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958)--S. 21 [as repealed by Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) (Amendment) Ordinance (II of 1962)-Revision-Order passed by Settlement Commissioner in revision becoming final-Held, could not be interfered with by his successor.-[ Revision (civil)]. ORDER ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, J.-This is a petition for special leave to appeal from the judgment of Lahore High Court dated 28-1-1979 by which Writ Petition No. 704-R of 1971 filed by Mirza Mubarik Ali respondent was allowed and the order of the Settlement Commissioner dated 22-7-1971 was declared as illegal and without lawful authority. By that order, learned Settlement Commissioner set aside the earlier order of his predecessor. in-office dated 24-7-1965, and the High Court interfered in' exercise of its constitutional juris­diction for the reason that may be stated in the words of the learned Single Judge of the High Court in the judgment to which exception is now being taken. This is what learned Single Judge held :--- "The essential facts of the case are that the auction in favour of the respondent No. 3 (petitioner herein) dated 24-5-1965 was cancelled by the learned Additional Settlement Commissioner on 13-7-1965. The order was upheld on revision by the learned Settlement Commissioner on 24-7-1965. This order could not have been set aside by the successor Settlement Commissioner vide the impugned order dated 22-7-1971 because the latter had undoubtedly no power of revision on the relevant date and, therefore, his order is totally without jurisdiction. The contentions of the learned counsel for the respondent that the petitioner has no locus standi and his application could not be entertained by the learned Chief Settlement Commissioner are without substance. The petitioner's application for transfer under Settlement Scheme No. VIII is still pending, the petitioner has a right to maintain this petition. The contention regarding misrepresentation…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492