Sh. MAHMOOD AHMAD vs SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB and others
The petitioner invoked the constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court to challenge an award made against him under the Co-operative Societies Act in favour of the Khanewal Central Co-operative Bank Limited, alleging that the Bank had misappropriated the sale proceeds of his mortgaged factory and immovable property given as security for a loan. The departmental authorities had previously rejected this contention after evaluating the evidence, and the High Court declined to interfere with this concurrent finding of fact in writ jurisdiction. Upon hearing the petitioner's counsel, the Supreme Court found no error in the High Court's refusal to interfere with the factual findings of the departmental authorities. Consequently, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition, affirming that findings of fact determined by departmental authorities and upheld by the High Court in constitutional jurisdiction will not be disturbed.
- Can the High Court interfere with a finding of fact determined by departmental authorities under writ jurisdiction?
- Whether a petitioner can challenge an award made under the Co-operative Societies Act by raising disputed questions of fact in constitutional jurisdiction?
- Co-operative Societies Act
ORDER
' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.--The petitioner invoked the Constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court to challenge an award made against him in accordance with the provisions of the Co-operative Societies Act in favour of the Khanewal Central Co-operative Bank Limited. His main plea was that by way of security for the loan he had mortgaged with the Bank his factory together with some other immovable property but that the Bank had misappropriated the sale proceeds thereof. This contention had been raised before the departmental authorities but after consideration of evidence was rejected. In writ jurisdiction the High Court declined to interfere with this finding of fact.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner we are not persuaded that the High Court erred in not interfering with the finding of the departmental authorities. The petition is dismissed.