Province of Punjab thr. the Deputy Commissioner, Collector District
This petition for leave to appeal was filed by the Province of Punjab against the judgment of the High Court upholding the appellate court decision which favored the landowner whose nine marlas of land was utilized for constructing a road without acquisition under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 or payment of compensation. The core legal question was whether the government could deprive a citizen of property without following due process of law and without paying compensation, while continuing frivolous litigation. The Supreme Court of Pakistan dismissed the petition, holding that the government's action violated fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 23 and 24 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. The Court laid down the principle that the government and its functionaries must act responsibly, respect constitutional property rights, avoid frivolous litigation that wastes public resources and court time, and pay requisite compensation alongside costs for unauthorized land deprivation.
- Can the government construct a road on private land without acquiring it under the Land Acquisition Act or paying compensation?
- Does the unauthorized deprivation of private land by the government violate the fundamental rights to acquire, hold, and dispose of property under the Constitution of Pakistan?
- Whether the government can be burdened with costs for engaging in frivolous litigation against a landowner?
- Section 1, Land Acquisition Act 1894
- Article 23, Constitution of Pakistan 1973
- Article 24, Constitution of Pakistan 1973
Qazi Faez Isa, CJ. On nine marlas of land a road was constructed by petitioners. However, since no compensation was paid for the said land nor was it acquired pursuant to the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ('the Act'), the owner filed a suit in the year 1997 and though the suit was dismissed the appeal against the same was allowed on 19 September 2009 and the judgment of the appellate court was upheld through the impugned judgment.
2. We inquired from the learned Additional Advocate General ('AAG') whether the land was compulsorily acquired under the Act, was gifted or an agreement was entered into with the owner of the land and the learned AAG answered in the negative. Nonetheless the petitioners have deemed it fit to assail the order of the High Court. The petition for leave to appeal has been signed by two AAGs, namely, Malik Abdul Aziz Awan and Mr. Asif Afzal Bhatti on 3 February 2021. The AOR was engaged by Mr. Bahadur Ali Khan, Secretary of the Government of the Punjab (Law & Parliamentary Affairs), Department.
3. This is a classic example of frivolous litigation, and that too by those whose salaries are paid by the taxpayers of the country. It appears that the ability to take a decision, whether to assail or not a decision does not exist in senior officers. They deemed it fit to challenge a matter of little financial significance and do so contrary to the provisions of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan which guarantees as a fundamental right the right to acquire, hold and dispose of property (Articles 23 and 24), and being oblivious to the fact that a person can only be compulsorily deprived of property provided compensation therefor is paid.
4. This is the fourth Court before which the Government of Punjab is a party, and it pleads by disregarding the Constitution and the law. Not only have public resources been wasted, but also Court time, both of which are a trust held on behalf of the people. The respondents who were deprived of their land must have spent money and time with regard to a case which should have never seen a court of law, provided the petitioners had abided by the Constitution and the law.
Whilst counsel of private parties are accountable to them, and may resort to unnecessary litigation, this is not expected from the petitioners. The Government of Punjab and every employee of it, including those in the office of the Advocate-General run on public funds, therefore, one expects a much higher standard from them. The government and its servants are there to serve the people. In this case, land was taken without compensating the respondents. Therefore, whilst declining leave and dismissing this petition, we direct the Government of Punjab to pay to the owners of the land, requisite compensation, within a period of thirty days from the receipt of this order and in addition also pay to them one million rupees as costs. Copy of this order be sent to the Chief Secretary, Punjab, and to the petitioners No.1 and 2 for information and compliance. Copy of this order be also sent to the respondents for information.
Cited by 9 cases
- Shahbaz Akmal Jandran vs Province of Punjab through Director General, Excise and Taxation, Lahore 2025 LHC 2944
- SHAHBAZ AKMAL JANDRAN Versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Director General, Excise and Taxation, Lahore 2025 PLD 649
- Ms. Jahanara etc vs Punjab Cooperative Board for Liquidation 2025 LHC 814, 2025 PLJ Lahore 475
- Ms. JAHANARA Versus PUNJAB COOPERATIVE BOARD FOR LIQUIDATION 2025 CLC 1307
- Mushtaq Ahmad etc vs Allah Ditta etc 2024 LHC 5612
- Mushtaq Ahmad Versus Allah Ditta 2025 MLD 1012
- Muhammad Sherin and others vs Ziarat Khan and others 2024 PHC 326, 2025 CLC 664
- MUHAMMAD SHERIN Versus ZIARAT KHAN 2025 CLC 664
- Muhammad Saadullah etc vs Province of Punjab through District Collector, Mandi Bahauddin 2025 LHC 3988