SHAHID IJAZ And Others vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, GUJRANWALA And Other
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal seeking to challenge an order of the Lahore High Court, which dismissed a constitutional petition against the cancellation of a land allotment. The core legal question was whether a writ petition could be maintained against an order of cancellation of land allotment after an alternative civil remedy had already been pursued and failed, and when the writ petition suffered from inordinate delay. The Supreme Court held that the High Court rightly dismissed the constitutional petition on the grounds of being incompetent—since the petitioners had already availed and failed in their remedy by filing a civil suit—and for suffering from laches after a delay of eight years. The key principle laid down is that a party cannot invoke constitutional jurisdiction after exhausting an alternative civil remedy to challenge the same administrative order, particularly when the petition suffers from unexplained laches.
- Can a party file a constitutional petition after availing and failing in a civil suit challenging the same administrative order?
- Does a writ petition filed after a delay of eight years against an order of cancellation of land allotment suffer from fatal laches?
ORDER
ABDUL SHAKURUL SALAM, J.---Some land was allotted in the name of Mst. Hashmat Bibi in March 1960. The name of the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners 3 to 6 Muhammad Akbar from whom petitioner Nos.1 and 2 claim rights was shown written by pencil in the allotment register. On an application of the respondents 2 and 3, the Additional Settlement Commissioner with the powers of the Chief Settlement Commissioner cancelled the allotment from the name of Muhammad Akbar vide order dated 17-11-1976. He filed a civil suit which was dismissed on 14-6- 1980 by the learned Civil Judge, Gujranwala, but on appeal the case was remanded on 13-1-1981 for re-trial. After the re-trial, the learned Civil Judge again dismissed the suit on 10-11-1987. The petitioners in the meanwhile also fled Writ Petition No. 34-R/1984 on 18-1-1984 challenging the order of the Additional Settlement Commissioner dated 17-11-1976. It has been dismissed by a learned Single Judge vide order dated 10-3-1988 on the grounds that the petitioners have already availed the remedy by filing a suit challenging the impugned order and having failed to achieve their object they cannot file a Constitution Petition. He also observed that against the order of cancellation of allotment by the Additional Settlement Commissioner on 17-11-1976, writ petition filed after 8 years suffered from laches and is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone.
Petitioners seek leave to appeal.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the allotment in favour of their predecessor- in-interest could not be cancelled as he was a Jammu and Kashmir refugee.
3. Not only the allotment was in pencil but the same has been cancelled by the competent authority on 17-11-1976. Challenge to the order having failed before the Civil Court, the learned Single Judge dismissed the petition on the ground of being incompetent and suffering from laches.
The order of the learned Single Judge is perfectly in order. No interference is called for.
4. The petition is, therefore, dismissed.