MIAN MUHAMMAD AND Others vs THE MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE THROUGH ITS
This petition for leave to appeal arose from the dismissal of a constitutional petition by the Lahore High Court. The petitioners, who occupied shops in Khushab, initially paid rent to the Municipal Committee but later paid rent to the Government of the Punjab after the Government claimed ownership of the site. When the Municipal Committee resolved to demolish the shops to construct a bus stand, the petitioners challenged the action. The High Court dismissed the petition, noting pending proceedings under M.L.O. 821 and the historical tenancy relationship. The Supreme Court of Pakistan upheld the dismissal, holding that the status of the petitioners as tenants, trespassers, or licensees constituted a controverted question of fact. The Court laid down the principle that disputed questions of fact regarding the status of occupants and property title cannot be resolved under the constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court, and the appropriate remedy for such disputes lies before a civil court of competent jurisdiction.
- Can a disputed question of fact regarding an occupant's status as a tenant, trespasser, or licensee be resolved under the constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court?
- What is the appropriate legal forum for resolving a title dispute and tenancy status between occupants, a municipal committee, and the provincial government?
- Does the existence of a factual controversy regarding property ownership and tenancy bar the maintainability of a constitutional petition?
- Article 199, Constitution of Pakistan 1973
ORDER
1. SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.-The petitioners who are in occupation of shops at one time claimed by the Municipal Committee, Khushab, seek leave to appeal against the judgment in limine of the Lahore High Court whereby their cons--titutional petition was dismissed.
2. The petitioners claimed to have obtained on rent sites in Gulistan Babar Khushab. They also claimed to have constructed shops over it and to have beets paying rent for the premises to the Municipal Committee. Subsequently the. Government of the Punjab claimed ownership of the site and the shops and thereupon the petitioners started paying rent to the Government. The Municipal Committee passed a resolution whereby these shops were to be demolished and a bus stand is to be constructed 'there. The petitioners chal--lenged this action by constitutional petition which has been dismissed on the ground inter alia that proceedings are taken place under M. L. O. 821. The right of the Municipal Committee to evict the petitioners was found not to be lacking in view of the earlier tenancy agreement between the petitioners and the Municipal Committee.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that if at all the pro--ceedings under M. L. O.821 were pending they were against only two of the petitioners, that is, petitioners Nos. 1 and 2 and not against others and that such proceedings should not have barred constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court. Further it is contended that there was a dispute regarding title between the Municipal Committee and the Government of the Punjab and unless it is resolved in favour of the Municipal Committee the latter could not proceed with a scheme of bus stand.
4. We find that the status of the petitioners as tenants, trespassers or licensees) is in dispute. It is a controverted question of fact. Such a question cannot be resolved in constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court. Without pre judging the issues on facts the petitioners should have been directed to seek their remedy in the civil Court in accordance with the law. Constitutional Petition on such a subject was not, in any case competent. We do not find any merit in the petition and leave to appeal is refused.
Cited by 11 cases
- GHULAM AULIA Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary 2015 PLC(CS) 1149
- ABDUL RAHMAN BALOCH vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN through Chairman and 3 others 2013 CLD 2187
- NABI DAD Versus REGISTRAR COURT OF APPEALS, JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL'S DEPARTMENT, G.H.Q. RAWALPINDI 2009 PLD 27
- NAQEEB ULLAH KHAN vs Malik IMRAN KHAN and 6 others 2006 PLD Peshawar 21
- SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB, FOREST DEPARTMENT, PUNJAB LAHORE Versus GHULAM NABI 2001 PLD 415
- SARDAR MUHAMMAD and 21 others vs FAQIR MUHAMMAD and 4 others 1996 CLC 916
- BENEDICT I. DE SOUZA Versus KARACHI BUILDING CONTROL AUTHORITY 1988 CLC 1033
- NABI DAD vs REGISTRAR COURT OF APPEALS JUDGE, A.G. DEPARTMENT, G.H. 2010 PLJ Quetta 19
- MERAJ LIMITED vs PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through its Chief Secretary, Goverment of Punjab, Lahore and 4 others 2012 PLJ Lahore 568
- Abdul Rahman Baloch vs Securities & Exchange Commission Of Pakistan,Islamabad Through Its Chairman And 3 Others 2013 P.C.T.LR. 1319
- PAKISTAN INSTITUTE OF PHARMACY, SAHIWAL through Principal vs GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN MINISTRY OF NATIONAL REGULATIONS & SERVICES through Secretary, Islamabad and another 2015 PLJ Lahore 586