Ch. MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER And Others vs MUHAMMAD JAMEEL And Other
This matter originated as a petition for leave to appeal filed by Settlement authorities challenging an order passed by the High Court in a writ petition. The core legal question before the Supreme Court concerned the propriety of the High Court's procedure in 'disposing' of a writ petition in a manner that granted significant relief to the respondents without formally accepting the petition or providing adequate justification. Upon hearing the arguments, the Supreme Court observed that the impugned order, which granted major relief without a formal acceptance of the petition, appeared prima facie inconsistent with the established practice of the High Court when adjudicating matters of vital importance to the parties involved. Consequently, the Court held that the petition for leave to appeal should be converted into a regular appeal to allow for a full review of the proceedings. The Court directed the parties to prepare the appeal based on the existing record while permitting the submission of necessary additional documents to facilitate a proper determination of the issues raised.
- Can a High Court grant major relief in a writ petition without formally accepting the petition?
- Is the disposal of a writ petition without a formal order of acceptance consistent with established High Court practice in matters of vital importance?
ORDER
1. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.---Leave to appeal has been sought by the Settlement authorities against the "disposal" of a writ petition filed by the respondents' side; ,with the effect that without "accepting" the petition, major relief has been allowed to them, prima facie without justification.
2. After hearing the learned counsel, we feel that the "disposal" of the-writ petition by the impugned order is prima facie, not in accordance with the normal practice of the High Court, when dealing with questions of vital importance to the parties concerned. This petition accordingly is converted into an appeal and fixed for hearing in October 1988.
3. The appeal shall be prepared on the present record with direction to the parties concerned to file all necessary additional documents.