SULTAN AHMAD Versus SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER BAHWALNAGER, CANAL CIRCLE BAHAWALNAGAR

ORDER

The main argument that the learned counsel wants to advance is that mandatory provisions of section 20 of the Canal and Drainage Act, have not been complied with, and thus, the order (Annexure `E') and those passed thereafter are void ab initio. The same point can be urged in a civil suit before a civil Court. The only answer given by the learned counsel to the question as to why that remedy should not be pursued by the petitioner is that the proceedings in the suit would be lengthy. The long and heavy pendency of writ petitions filed m the High Court when compared to disposal of cases in Civil Courts has shown that in the present circumstances remedy by way of civil suit is speedier.

2. On the question of early hearing of a writ petition I am of the view that` directing early hearing of a writ petition without affording opportunity of hearing on this point to all the writ petitioners whose writ petitions are pending in the High Court is against the interest of justice.

3. There is no justification for admitting this petition. I have expressed similar view in Writ Petitions Nos. 1340/73 and 1469/73. For the above reasons, this petition is dismissed.

4. This order shall not be a bar to the petitioners seeking remedy by way of a civil suit.

M.Y.H./3992/L Petition dismissed.