Case Details

Citation(s)
1989 SLG 891 1989 SLD 891 1989 SCMR 1087 1989 SLD 1448 1989 SCMR 1087
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No.190 of 1984, decision dated: 9-08-1988
SHAFIUR RAHMAN AND GHULAM MUJADDID, JJ

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

MUHAMMAD HAYAT KHAN and another

VS

THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER (LAND), LAHORE DIVISION, LAHORE and 6 others

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 185(3)

Evacuee Property and Displaced Persons Laws (Repeal) Act (XIV of 1975)--S.2--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)--Petitioners' earlier. Constitutional petition dismissed by High Court--Petitioners preferred no further .relief against that petition but filed another Constitutional petition on the same subject which was also dismissed as also their appeal--Petitioners had sought to undo allotment order in respondent's favour, dated 5-9-1972 against which they had not agitated by way of appeal or revision before the hierarchy of Settlement Officers--High Court's refusal to undo allotment after ten years, during which time petitioners remained inactive, being unexceptionable, there was no justification for re-opening the matter when petitioners reconciled themselves with the same--No ground having been made out, leave to appeal was refused. Raja Abdul Razzaque, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners. Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing: 9th August, 1988. JUDGMENT SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.--The petitioners who approached the High Court in Constitutional jurisdiction for the second time, seek leave to appeal against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, dated 10-12-1983 whereby their petition was dismissed and also appeal against such dismissal. In the first round, their Constitutional petition was dismissed on 26th of March, 1983. They preferred no further relief against it, but filed another Constitutional petition on the same subject which was dismissed by the High Court in limine. The High Court observed as follows:-- "The further argument of the learned counsel that the previous writ petition having been dismissed on a technical ground the present writ petition was not barred, has also not impressed me. It is to be remembered that the constitutional jurisdiction of this Court is discretionary and the conduct of a petitioner is a relevant consideration for exercise of discretion. I am not inclined to disturb the allotment of the respondents after a delay of ten years. The petitioners are to blame themselves in failing to seek timely remedies…
🔒
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