MIRWAS KHAN vs ADDITIONAL SECRETARY And Other
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against a judgment of the Peshawar High Court, which set aside an order passed by the Additional Secretary, Home Department, Government of N.-W.F.P. The dispute originated from a pre-emption suit filed under the Provincially Administered Tribal Areas Civil Procedure (Special Provisions) Regulation, 1975, which was adjudicated by a Jirga, resulting in a decree in favor of the respondents. While the Additional Commissioner upheld this decree, the Additional Secretary later reversed it in revision. The High Court, exercising its constitutional jurisdiction, restored the initial concurrent findings of the lower forums. The Supreme Court examined whether the High Court correctly restored these findings. The Court held that the High Court’s decision was correct, noting that the petitioner failed to demonstrate any defect or irregularity in the proceedings as required under Section 12 of the Provincially Administered Tribal Areas Civil Procedure (Special Provisions) Regulation, 1975. Consequently, the Supreme Court refused to grant leave to appeal, affirming that concurrent findings based on a valid Jirga report should not be disturbed absent procedural illegality.
- Can a revisional authority set aside concurrent findings of fact based on a Jirga report without establishing a defect or irregularity under the Provincially Administered Tribal Areas Civil Procedure (Special Provisions) Regulation, 1975?
- Does the High Court have the authority to restore concurrent findings of lower forums when exercising constitutional jurisdiction?
- Section 12, Provincially Administered Tribal Areas Civil Procedure (Special Provisions) Regulation, 1975
ORDER
1. S. USMAN ALI SHAH, J: --The petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the judgment of the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar, dated 14-2-1989, whereby writ petition of the respondents Nos.4 and 5 against the order dated 23-9-1986 of the Addl. Secretary, Govt. Of N.-W.F.P., Home Department, Peshawar was accepted.
2. Respondents Nos.4 and 5 had filed a suit for possession through pre--emption of the house in dispute against Amanullah and another, in the Court of EA.C. Daggar under the provisions of the Provincially Administered Tribal Areas Civil Procedure (Special Provisions) Regulation, 1975. The learned EA.C. Exercising the powers of Deputy Commissioner, under the Regulation referred the suit to a legally constituted Jirga. The Jirga members unanimously made a report in favour of the said respondents upon which the learned EA.C. Granted a decree in their favour vide his order dated 13- 12-1983. Mirwas Khan the present petitioner filed appeal before the learned Addl. Commissioner, Malakand Division which was dismissed on 19-11-1985. His revision petition before the learned Addl.
3. Home Secretary was accepted vide order dated 23-9-86.
4. Respondents Nos.4 and 5 being aggrieved filed writ petition in the Peshawar High Court. A learned Division Bench of the High Court while accepting the writ petition, set aside the order dated 23-9- 1986 of the Addl. Secretary Home and restored both the judgments of the learned Addl.
5. Commissioner dated 19-11-1985 and that of the EA.C. Dated 13-12-1983, vide impugned judgment.
6. After hearing both the learned counsel of the parties at length, we are satisfied that the Judges of the Division Bench of the High Court exercising their constitutional jurisdiction have arrived at a correct conclusion by restoring the concurrent findings of fact of the two Courts below, based on the unanimous report of the legally constituted Jirga under the PA.TA. Regulation. The learned counsel for the petitioner failed to point out before us that the Addl. Secretary Home has shown any defect or irregularity in the proceedings as envisaged by the Provisions of section 12 of the Provincially Administered Tribal Areas Civil Procedure (Special Provisions) Regulation, 1975. We think it is not a fit case in which leave' to appeal could be granted. The petition, accordingly is dismissed.
Cited by 1 case
- Mian NASEEB JAN and anothers vs MOAMBAR and 3 others 1992 SCMR 1638