AMANAT ALI vs SESSIONS JUDGE, ISLAMABAD and 5 others
This criminal revision petition under sections 435 and 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 challenges the order of the Sessions Judge, Islamabad, which directed the petitioner to vacate the disputed house and hand over possession to the legitimate allottee pursuant to an application under section 22-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The core legal questions relate to the maintainability of the revision petition against an administrative or Sessions Court order regarding property possession and the petitioner's legal entitlement to occupy the premises without a valid allotment letter. The Lahore High Court held that the revision petition is not maintainable, that the petition cannot be converted into a writ petition, and that the petitioner, being a trespasser without an allotment from the Estate Office, possesses no equitable right to remain in possession. The court laid down the principle that a person occupying property without a valid allotment letter cannot invoke the equity jurisdiction of the court to retain possession against a legitimate allottee.
- Whether a criminal revision petition is maintainable against an order directing the vacation of a disputed property?
- Can a criminal revision petition be converted into a constitutional writ petition under the circumstances?
- Does a person without a valid allotment letter from the Estate Office have an equitable right to retain possession of official quarters?
- Section 435, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 439, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 22-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' ABDUL SHAKOOR PARACHA, J.--- The petitioner through this criminal original under sections 435- 439, Cr.P.C. Impugns the order of the learned Sessions Judge, Islamabad, dated 13-6-2005, through which by accepting application 22-A, Cr.P.C. Filed by the allottee of the quarter in dispute namely Manzoor Ahmed, respondent No,4 directed the petitioner to vacate the house and hand over the possession.
2. Revision petition is not maintainable. When confronted with this situation, learned counsel states that the criminal original petition may be converted into writ petition.
3. The petition cannot be converted into writ petition.
4. On merits the petitioner has no allotment letter from the Estate Office in his favour. A specific finding has been recorded by the learned Sessions Judge that the petitioner is a trespasser and is in possession of the house, not allowing the Estate Officer to deliver possession of the quarter to a legitimate allottee.
5. The petitioner could not produce any allotment in his favour regarding the house nor he has any right to remain in its possession, therefore, the equity does not go in his favour to issue writ.
Consequently, this revision petition fails and is dismissed in limine. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.