PAKISTAN REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, MINISTRY OF REHABILITATION & WORKS, ISLAMABAD. AND Another vs H. H. AHMED
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal filed by the Government of Pakistan against a High Court judgment that upheld a decree awarding compensation to the respondent for the use and occupation of his requisitioned house. The core legal questions addressed were whether compensation was erroneously awarded beyond the date of vacation of the premises, whether a civil suit was barred due to the existence of a special procedure under the Sind (Requisition of Land) Act, 1947, and whether a decree could be legally passed against the Secretary of the Ministry of Rehabilitation and Works. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, holding that the record did not support the claim that compensation was awarded beyond the vacation date. Furthermore, the Court ruled that the civil suit was maintainable because the government had failed to appoint a Tribunal or Arbitrator to adjudicate compensation claims. Finally, the Court clarified that the Secretary was joined only in a representative capacity for the Central Government and was not personally liable under the decree. The judgment affirms that the absence of a designated statutory forum allows for civil litigation regarding compensation claims.
- Does the existence of a special procedure under the Sind (Requisition of Land) Act, 1947, bar a civil suit for compensation if no Tribunal or Arbitrator has been appointed?
- Can a decree be passed against a government official in their representative capacity without imposing personal liability?
- Is a civil suit for compensation maintainable against the government when the statutory mechanism for determining such compensation has not been activated?
- Section 79, Code of Civil Procedure 1908
- Sind (Requisition of Land) Act, 1947
ORDER
1. MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, J.-The Government of Pakistan seeks leave to appeal from the judgment and decree passed by a Division Bench of the High Court whereby the judgment and decree of reversal passed by the Additional District Judge were set aside and the decree passed by the trial Judge in favour of the plaintiff-respondent for recovery of Rs.16,150 as compensation for the use and occupation of his house requisitioned by the petitioner was restored.
2. The first contention raised by the learned counsel that the premises requisitioned by the Central Government were vacated on 31-12-1961, but the Courts below have granted compensation up to July 1962, finds no support from the record.
3. The second contention that no civil suit lay as special procedure was provided in the Sind (Requisition of Land) Act, 1947, is equally devoid of force as no Tribunal or Arbitrator was appointed by the Central Government to entertain the owners' claim for compensation.
4. Lastly it is urged that under section 79, C. P. C. No decree could be passed against the Secretary, Ministry of Rehabilitation& Works, but the Courts below have dismissed the suit both against the Pakistan Government and the Secretary as second defendant in the suit. It is not necessary to grant leave to appeal on this point as we find that no personal decree was passed against the Secretary, Rehabilitation & Works. He was joined in the suit as a representative of the Central Government and his name in the decree appears in that capacity only. He is not personally liable to pay the decretal amount.
5. The petition for leave to appeal is accordingly dismissed.
Cited by 5 cases
- Assistant Commissioner Khwazakhela and others vs Muhammad Rashad 2023 PHC 588, 2025 CLC 159
- ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER KHWAZAKHELA Versus MUHAMMAD RASHAD 2025 CLC 159
- RAEES GHULAM SARWAR through Attorney vs MANSOOR SADIQ ZAIDI and 4 2008 PLD Karachi 458
- RAEES GHULAM SARWAR Versus MANSOOR SADIQ ZAIDI 2008 CLD 1056
- THE STATE vs ABDULLAH 1975 P Cr. L J 1402