GOGAI And Others vs SIRAJ AHMAD And Other
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against a High Court judgment that set aside concurrent findings of the Deputy Commissioner, Additional Deputy Commissioner, and the Additional Secretary, Home and Tribal Affairs Department, regarding grazing rights in pastures located between Kalash and Maskoor villages in Chitral. The dispute arose under the Distribution of Property (Chitral) Regulation II of 1974. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to examine whether the High Court was justified in interfering with concurrent findings of fact within its discretionary writ jurisdiction. Furthermore, the Court seeks to determine whether, assuming there were legal defects in the lower forums' decisions, the High Court should have remanded the matter to the designated authority for a fresh decision rather than setting the findings aside entirely. Finally, the Court will address whether the writ petition was filed by an aggrieved party. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal and ordered that the stay order previously granted shall continue pending the final disposal of the appeal.
- Was the High Court justified in upsetting concurrent findings of fact by lower forums within its discretionary writ jurisdiction?
- If legal defects exist in lower forum decisions, is it necessary to remand the case to the designated authority for a fresh decision?
- Does a party have the standing to file a writ petition if they are not an aggrieved party?
- Distribution of Property (Chitral) Regulation II of 1974
ORDER
1. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, CJ. ---Leave to appeal has been sought by the applicants/plaintiffs' side under the Distribution of Property (Chitral) Regulation II of 1974, against the acceptance by the High Court, of respondents' Constitutional (Writ) petition whereby the concurrent findings and decisions in favour of the petitioners' side, by Deputy Commissioner, Chitral, Additional Deputy Commissioner, and Additional Secretary, Home and Tribal Affairs Department, N: W.F.P, were set aside.
2. The dispute relating to grazing right in the disputed pastures located around and between the Kalash and Maskoor villages in Chitral.
3. After hearing the learned counsel we consider it a fit case for grant of leave to appeal, inter alia, to examine:--
(a) Whether the High Court was justified in upsetting the findings by the three forums below in its discretionary writ jurisdiction;
(b) Even if it be assumed that there were some defects/errors which utluited to be rectified, whether it was not necessary and/or proper to remand the case to the designated authority for fresh decision; and
(c) Whether the writ petition was filed by an aggrieved party; We accordingly grant leave to appeal.
4. Security Rs. 5,000.
5. The appeal shall be prepared on the present record with direction to the parties for addition of all those documents which would be necessary for proper disposal of the appeal.
6. Stay to continue,