| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2005 SLG 1464 2005 SLD 1464 2005 CLC 1979 |
Supreme Court (AJ&K)
C.A. No.175 of 2003, decision dated: 18-03-2005. (On appeal from the judgment of High Court, dated 8-9-2003 in Writ Petition No.633 of 2001).
SYED MANZOOR HUSSAIN GILANI AND CHAUDHARY MUHAMMAD TAJ, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
C.A. No.175 of 2003, decision dated: 18-03-2005. (On appeal from the judgment of High Court, dated 8-9-2003 in Writ Petition No.633 of 2001).
SYED MANZOOR HUSSAIN GILANI AND CHAUDHARY MUHAMMAD TAJ, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
MUHAMMAD ASLAM
VS
AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR through Chief Secretary, Muzaffarabad and 3 others
Law:
Section:
(a) Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974)-------S. 44---Writ jurisdiction-Scope-Disputed question of fact, meaning of---Disputed question of fact would not mean the denial of a right asserted in a writ petition---If a party asserted a right and other party denied the right, it would not make a question as disputed one---Disputed question of fact would mean that a certain matter could not be resolved , unless a detailed scrutiny of facts was made or some evidence was recorded. Abdul Waheed Butt v. Excise and Taxation Officer and 3 others 2003 SCR 298; Syeda Shaista Mumtaz v. Secretary Education and 6 others 2003 SCR 446 and Ch. Muhammad Mahmood v. Aurangzeb and 6 others 1997 SCR 14 ref. (b) Azad Jammu and Kashmir Rehabilitation Act, 1956---- ---S. 6-A---Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974), Ss.42 & 44---Writ petition---Allotment of land---Appeal to Supreme Court---Appellant had filed writ petition for issuance of requisite direction on the ground that he was lawful owner of land in dispute which was in possession of respondents who were not paying rent---High Court entertained certain doubts about allotment and also proceeded to dismiss writ petition on ground that disputed questions of fact were involved in the case which could not be resolved in writ jurisdiction---Matter was remanded by Supreme Court to High Court to decide writ petition after resolving question of validity of allotment and to make inquiry in any manner, if need would so arise. Imdad Ali Mallick for Appellant. Raja Ibrar Hussain, Advocate-General for Respondents. Date of hearing: 14th March, 2005. JUDGMENT CHAUDHARY MUHAMMAD TAJ, J.-----This appeal, by leave, has been filed to challenge the judgment passed by the High Court on 8-9-2003 whereby the writ petition was dismissed. 2. The facts are that the appellant filed a writ. petition in the High Court seeking direction against the respondents to acquire the land in his ownership comprising Survey No.694 measuring 14 Kanals, 6 Marlas situate in Village Pallandri, Tehsil Pallandri. It was claimed that the land ' is in possession of Health Department of Azad Jammu and Kashmir Government…
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