Pakistan Case LawLAHORE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION Versus MUHAMMAD ANWAR And Other
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal filed by the Lahore Municipal Corporation against a High Court judgment that set aside an order of the Settlement Commissioner. The dispute arose over a piece of land measuring 9 Marlas, which had been allotted by Settlement authorities to the respondents' predecessor-in-interest. The respondents had subsequently constructed a structure on the land with the Corporation's permission. However, the Settlement Commissioner later cancelled the allotment upon a Mukhbari application, asserting the land belonged to the Municipal Corporation. The High Court declared this cancellation illegal. The petitioner contends that because the property was never part of the compensation pool, the Settlement authorities lacked the jurisdiction to transfer it, and that the Corporation's prior sanction for construction did not estop it from asserting ownership. The Supreme Court, finding that the contentions raised regarding the scope of the compensation pool and the authority of the Settlement Commissioner require deeper judicial examination, granted leave to appeal to resolve whether the land was lawfully transferable by the Settlement authorities.
- Can land that does not form part of the compensation pool be validly transferred by Settlement authorities?
- Does the grant of building permission by a Municipal Corporation estop it from later claiming ownership of the land?
- Are the considerations of prior sanction and lack of previous claim sufficient to set aside an order of the Settlement Commissioner cancelling an allotment?
ORDER
SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.---A piece of land measuring about 9 Marlas and situate within the limits of the Municipal Corporation, Lahore was allotted by the Settlement authorities to the predecessor- in-interest of the respondents. After obtaining permission from the Municipal Corporation the respondents raised a structure thereon. Subsequently, on a Mukhbari application, the Settlement Commissioner cancelled the allotment on the ground that the land in question belonged to the Municipal Corporation. The respondents filed a writ petition in the High Court to call in question the legality Commissioner. A learned Single Judge accepted the writ petition and declared the order of cancellation to be illegal and without lawful authority. The Municipal Corporation seeks leave to appeal from the order of the learned Single Judge.
2.In support of this petition it is stated that as the property did not form part of the compensation pool, it could not be transferred by the Settlement authorities to anyone. The considerations that the Municipal Corporation had granted sanction to the respondents for raising a structure thereon and that it had not previously laid any claim to the land in dispute were not sufficient to set aside the order of the Settlement Commissioner.
3.The contention raised in support of this petition needs examination. Leave to appeal is granted. Security for costs in the sum of Rs.2,000. The appeal may be made ready for hearing on the present record with permission to the parties to file additional documents, if any.
Judges on this bench
- Saad Saood Jan2,559 judgments
- S. Usman Ali Shah326 judgments