SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER (LANDS) Versus WALI MUHAMMAD
This matter involves petitions for leave to appeal against a judgment of the Appeal Bench of the Lahore High Court, which had set aside orders of Settlement authorities and restored land holdings to the respondent petitioners. The core legal questions concern the competency of Intra-Court Appeals in light of prior Supreme Court precedents, the status of property under the Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act, 1958, specifically whether it was acquired under Section 4(2) and formed part of the Compensation Pool, and the vesting of land in the Provincial Government under the Evacuee Property and Displaced Persons Laws (Repeal) Act, 1973. Additionally, the court must determine the effect of prior Supreme Court decisions on the finality of earlier administrative determinations regarding the evacuee or non-evacuee character of property interests. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal, noting that these issues require an authoritative pronouncement, and ordered the appeals and pending review applications to be heard together.
- Whether an Intra-Court Appeal is competent and maintainable against a judgment of a High Court in view of the decision in Mst. Karim Bibi v. Hussain Bakhsh?
- Whether property not acquired under Section 4(2) of the Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act 1958 forms part of the Compensation Pool?
- Does land, in the absence of a notification under Section 4(2) of the Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act 1958, vest in the Provincial Government under Section 3 of the Evacuee Property and Displaced Persons Laws (Repeal) Act 1973?
- Section 4(2), Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act 1958
- Section 3, Evacuee Property and Displaced Persons Laws (Repeal) Act 1973
ORDER
1. SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.‑ ‑Leave to appeal is sought by the Settlement Commissioner in twelve matters, questioning in all of them the correctness and the competence of the judgment of the Appeal Bench of the Lahore High Court dated 27th of March, 1983 whereby the orders of the dismissal of constitutional petitions were set aside, the orders of the Settlement authorities ‑‑were declared to be without lawful authority and the land holdings of the respondent writ petitioners were ordered to "remain with them" "with the rights and obligations" as were attached to them prior to 12th of December, 1978.
2. There are two other such petitions (C.P.S.L.As. 877 and 897 of 1983) by private persons challenging the same decision of the Appeal Bench, additionally on the ground that they were not issued notices in appeal and stand condemned unheard resulting in deprivation of their property rights.
3. There are three Review petitions seeking recall of orders dated 3‑11‑1984 and 5‑6‑1985 of this Court refusing Leave to Appeal against the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 18‑5‑1982 and 22‑5‑1982 which decisions on some other appeals stands set aside by the decision of the Appeal Bench already referred to.
4. After hearing the learned counsels at some length, we consider that important questions of law arise for consideration requiring an authoritative pronouncement of this Court. Some of these are as follows:‑
(1) Whether an Intra‑Court Appeal was at all competent and maintainable in view of the decision of this Court in Mst. Karim Bibi v. Hussain Bakhsh P L D 1985 S C 344.
(2) Whether the property in dispute was never acquired under section 4 subsection (2) of the Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act,1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), at no stage formed part of the Compensation Pool and was not, therefore, available for settlement of refugees.
(3) Whether the land in dispute in the absence of a notification under section 4(2) of the Act came to vest in the Provincial Government under section 3 of the Evacuee Property and Displaced Persons Laws (Repeal) Act, 1973 and was available for adjusting the claim of the grantees belonging to the criminal tribe.
(4) The effect of the decision of this Court dated 22‑5‑1978 in Civil Appeal No. 188 of 1970 and others on the finality of the decision of the Additional Settlement Commissioner dated 1‑12‑1966 regarding the evacuee or non‑evacuee character of the interest in the light of the decision of this Court in Sahibrai v . The Custodian of Evacuee Property South Zone, West Pakistan, Karachi PLD 1957 SC 63.
5. Leave to appeal is granted. The appeals are to be heard on the present record with liberty to the parties to file such additional documents as they may consider necessary. Security for costs in the sum of Rs.1,000 each in two petitions filed by private persons.
6. The three review applications to come up for hearing along with the main appeals which should be made ready for hearing at Rawalpindi at an early date.
7. M.I. Leave granted.