Case Details

Citation(s)
1964 SLG 13 1964 SLD 13 1964 PLD 829
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. 151 of 1963, decision dated: 24th June 1964
A. R. CORNELIUS, C, J., S. A. RAHMAN, FAZLE-AKBAR, B. Z. KAIKAUS AND HAMOODUR RAHMAN, JJ
Nasim Hassan Shah Senior Advocate (Shaukat Ali Advocate Supreme Court with him) instructed by Khalilur Rahman Attorney for Appellant. Malik Shaukat Ali Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Iftikhar-ud-Din Ahmad Attorney for
Respondents Nos. 1 and 2. S. M.

GHULAM MOHIUDDIN

VS

(1) CHIEF SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER (PAKISTAN), LAHORE (2) KHAN FARZAND ALI KHAN, SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER, LAHORE DIVISION, LAHORE AND (3) DR. A. H. KHOKHAR

Law: Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958

Section: 21

(a) Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958), S. 21 (1) proviso (c)-Proviso in nature of exception to opening words of' section-Excludes jurisdiction of review where appeal or revision has already been preferred-Knowledge of Settlement Authority of pendency of appeal or revision not necessary-Such knowledge irrelevant-Mere pendency of appeal or revision creates bar to jurisdiction-Order of Settlement Authority in contravention of proviso a nullity-Certiorari, however, will not issue "as a matter of course" to quash such order-Failure to have raised objection as to jurisdiction before Settlement Authority concerned at earliest opportunity disentitles party to relief by certiorari-Such relief discretionary-Refusal of certiorari not based on any principle of waiver or acquiescence in jurisdiction on behalf of such party-[Laws (Continuance in Force) Order (I of 1958), Art. 2 (4)]. Proviso (c) to subsection (1) of section 21, Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958 is in the nature of an exception to the general power of review given by the opening words of the section and it clearly not only excludes the jurisdic­tion to review where an appeal or a petition for revision has already been preferred but also by the use of the mandatory word "shall" prohibits the authorities concerned from reviewing their own orders or the orders of their predecessors in such circum­stances. This proviso does not say that where an appeal or a revision has been filed to the knowledge of the authority concerned he shall not exercise his review jurisdiction. Knowledge of the filing of the appeal or the revision is wholly irrelevant, for, the mere pendency of such an appeal or revision is sufficient to create a bar upon the power of review. The words used in the statute constitute "a command by law that a certain thing shall not be done in certain circumstances". The result of such a prohibition must, therefore, be that if it is done, notwithstanding the existence of those circumstances, then it will have no legal validity. The contention that this section does not contain a total prohibition cannot be accepted. The bar is a complete…
🔒
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