| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2008 SLG 1978 2008 SLD 1978 2008 PLD 582 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No.469 of 1999, decided on 1st April, 2008., (On appeal from the judgment dated 8-10-1996 passed by Division Bench of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, in Writ Petition No.4430 of 1996).
MUHAMMAD NAWAZ ABBASI, MIAN HAMID FAROOQ AND MUHAMMAD FARRUKH MAHMUD, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Civil Appeal No.469 of 1999, decided on 1st April, 2008., (On appeal from the judgment dated 8-10-1996 passed by Division Bench of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, in Writ Petition No.4430 of 1996).
MUHAMMAD NAWAZ ABBASI, MIAN HAMID FAROOQ AND MUHAMMAD FARRUKH MAHMUD, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
SIKANDAR and 3 others
VS
FEDERAL LAND COMMISSION, ISLAMAMAD and 3 others
Law:
Section:
(a) Land Reforms Regulation, 1972 [MLR 115]------Para. 18(3)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)---Eligibility for grant of resumed land---Leave to appeal was granted by Supreme Court to consider questions as to whether factually petitioners' entitlement to the disputed land had been determined, if so, whether the Member, Federal Land Commission was justified in remanding the case and whether High Court was justified to maintain the said order of Member, Federal Land Commission. (b) Land Reforms Regulation, 1972 [MLR 115]-------Para. 18(3)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)---Eligibility to grant of resumed land---Basic facts were admitted---Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court---Scope---Deputy Land Commissioner, in the present case, after remand of the case by the Federal Land Commission, having conducted a thorough inquiry, prepared the list of eligible persons and passed order accordingly, therefore, subject to all just exceptions apparently no further enquiry was required to be conducted---High Court, in its constitutional jurisdiction, in a case in which facts were not as such disputed, could pass appropriate order on merits in respect of legal rights of the parties involved therein and should not remand the case to a lower forum which may not serve any purpose except to prolong ' the litigation---Judgment rendered by the High Court in a slipshod manner without appreciating the legal and factual aspects of the case in the light of material available on record and determining the right of allotment of resumed land, was not correct exercise of the jurisdiction---High Court, in the light of the facts and circumstances of the case having such background, was required to determine the question of eligibility of the parties in letter and spirit and instead of remanding the case to the Land Commission it should have passed an. appropriate order on merits on the basis of available record---Supreme Court allowed the appeal against said of the High Court and remanded the case to the High Court for decision of constitutional petition on merits afresh in accordance with law. Mian Fazal-e-Mehmood, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for Appellants.…
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