LALA AND Another vs MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE, WEST PAKISTAN, LAHORE
The petitioners sought leave to appeal against an order of the West Pakistan High Court, which had dismissed their writ petition in default due to the absence of the petitioners and their counsel, and subsequently refused to restore it, a decision affirmed in limine by a Letters Patent Bench. The core legal question concerned whether the lower courts properly exercised their discretion in refusing to condone the absence of counsel and restore the writ petition. The Supreme Court held that the lower courts properly exercised their discretion based on the facts of the case and found no grounds for interference. Furthermore, on the merits, the Supreme Court held that if the disputed property was evacuee trust property, action lay with the Evacuee Trust Board, leaving the petitioners without locus standi. The petition for leave to appeal was accordingly dismissed.
- Whether the High Court properly exercised its discretion in refusing to restore a writ petition dismissed in default due to the absence of the petitioners and their counsel?
- Does a party have locus standi to file a writ petition concerning evacuee trust property when the statute vests the power to take action in the Evacuee Trust Board?
ORDER
1. WAHIDUDDIN AHMAD, J.-The petitioners filed Writ Petition No. 1207 of 1967 which came up for hearing before a learned Single Judge of the West Pakistan High Court, Lahore, on the 27th June 1969. The petitioners and their counsel being absentee, the writ petition was dismissed in default at about 9-40 a.m. Thereafter, the petitioners moved an application for restoration of the writ petition but the same was dismissed on the 30th June 1969, on the ground that the explanation given by the petitioners' counsel was not correct. The learned Single Judge observed that the Junior of the petitioners' counsel was not present at the time when the case was called in Court nor did he inform that Mr. Almas Ali was coming. He further observed that it was wrong that Mr. Almas came to the Court within a couple of minutes thereafter. The matter was then taken before the Letters Patent Bench of the West Pakistan High Court and the appeal was dismissed in limine on the 23rd July 1969. A Division Bench of the West Pakistan High Court agreed with the view of the learned Single Judge and found no ground to condone the absence of the petitioners and their counsel.
2. The petitioners seek permission to file an appeal against the said order.
3. It is contended on behalf of the petitioners that the learned Court below should have condoned the absence of the petitioners' counsel and restored the writ petition for final hearing. We have gone through the orders of the learned Single Judge and the Letters Patent Bench and are satisfied that on the facts of the present case they have exercised the discretion vested in them properly. There is no ground to interfere with that discretion.
4. On merits, the petitioners have no case. The allegation is that the property in dispute is an evacuee trust property. If that is so, it is for the Evacuee Trust Board to take action against the respondents.
5. The petitioners have no locus stand Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.