MUHAMMAD SHAFIQ vs CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY through its
This matter comes before the Supreme Court of Pakistan upon a petition for leave to appeal filed by Muhammad Shafiq against the Capital Development Authority. The core legal questions examined by the Court include whether the petitioner possessed the requisite locus standi to maintain a Constitution Petition in light of the precedent established in Mian Fazal Din v. Lahore Improvement Trust, and whether the sanction granted to the respondents violated the approved scheme, established practice, and policy of the Capital Development Authority given that the sanctioned scheme was not altered. The Court granted leave to appeal to consider these questions, ordered security of Rs. 5,000, directed that the appeal be heard on the existing record with liberty to file additional documents, and declined to grant any interim relief while laying down directions for summoning any necessary record from the Capital Development Authority.
- Whether the petitioner had the locus standi to successfully maintain the Constitution Petition in view of the decision in Mian Fazal Din v. Lahore Improvement Trust?
- Was the sanction granted to the respondents in violation of the Scheme and the established practice and policy of the Capital Development Authority?
ORDER
SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.--Leave to appeal is granted to examine, inter alia, the following questions of law:-
(1) Whether in view of the decision of this Court in the case of Mian Fazal Din v. Lahore Improvement Trust, Lahore and another PLD 1969 SC 223, the petitioner had not the locus standi to successfully maintain the Constitution Petition?
(2) It being not the case of the C.DA. That the sanctioned/approved Scheme was in any manner altered, was the sanction granted to the respondents not in violation of the Scheme and the established practice and policy of the C.DA. Itself?
2. Security--Rs,5,000. The appeal to be heard on the present record with liberty to parties to place on record such documents as they consider necessary. No interim relief.
3. If the petitioner wants any record of the C.DA. To be summoned for the hearing, he shall provide the particulars thereof and the Office shall ensure its availability at the time of hearing.