ZAHOOR AHMAD Versus EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE
This constitutional petition was filed under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, challenging an order passed by an Executive Magistrate. The core dispute arose from a complaint filed by a private party alleging fraudulent attestation of a land mutation (Mutation No. 1622). The Executive Magistrate conducted an inquiry, cancelled the mutation, and directed the complainant to lodge an F.I.R. against the petitioners under the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The petitioners challenged this order, arguing it was passed without lawful authority. The High Court held that the dispute regarding the validity of the land mutation was essentially civil in nature and was already the subject of a pending civil suit before a Civil Judge. Consequently, the Court ruled that the Executive Magistrate lacked the jurisdiction to entertain the complaint or adjudicate upon the validity of the mutation. The impugned order was declared illegal, without lawful authority, and of no legal effect, establishing the principle that Executive Magistrates cannot usurp the jurisdiction of civil courts in matters involving property disputes.
- Does an Executive Magistrate have the jurisdiction to cancel a land mutation while a civil suit regarding the same property is pending?
- Can an Executive Magistrate adjudicate upon disputes that are essentially civil in nature?
- Is an order passed by an Executive Magistrate regarding the cancellation of a land mutation valid if the matter is sub judice before a civil court?
- Article 199, Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973
- Section 419, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 420, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 182, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
MIAN SHAKIRULLAH JAN, J.-- - Zahoor Ahmad Khan etc. have filed this Constitutional petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, for declaring the order of respondent No. 1 as illegal, without lawful authority and of no legal effect.
2. Brief facts of the case which compelled the petitioners to file this petition, according to the petition, are that Mst. Niaz Parwara, respondent No.2, filed an application before Executive Magistrate/Incharge Complaint Cell, respondent No. 1, to the effect that she is owner of landed property measuring 40 Kanals, 2-1/2 Marlas situated at Taibana Maira Turangzai and Mutation No. 1622, dated 29-8-1982 was fraudulently attested on her behalf; that respondent No. 1 proceeded in .the matter, summoned the petitioners, conducted inquiry into the matter and cancelled Mutation No. 1622 and further respondent No.2 was directed to lodge F.I.R. against the petitioners under sections 419/420 and 182, P.P.C.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the file.
4. In this case the dispute between the parties is of civil nature and the Executive Magistrate has no jurisdiction to entertain the application of respondent No.2. The respondent No.2 has already instituted a civil suit in the Court of Civil Judge, Charsadda, in which she has challenged the validity of the same mutation i.e. Mutation 1622, which is pending Adjudication. Keeping in view the legal position, this writ petition is accepted, the impugned order, dated 15-9-2000, passed by respondent No. 1 is declared illegal, without lawful authority and of no legal effect. No order as to costs.
H.B.T./227/P Petition accepted.