2024 CLC 1828 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

EVACUEE TRUST PROPERTY BOARD VS GHYAS AHMAD RANA When basic order is passed without jurisdiction and without lawful authority, then all superstructure built on such order automatically collapses/crumbles down. Citation Name: 2024 CLC 1828 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE EVACUEE TRUST PROPERTY BOARD VS GHYAS AHMAD RANA any order passed by an authority without having jurisdiction is void ab-initio. Citation Name: 2024 CLC 1828 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE EVACUEE TRUST PROPERTY BOARD VS GHYAS AHMAD RANA Ss. 17 & 30---Scheme for the Management and Disposal of Urban Evacuee Trust Properties, 1977, Chapter III, R.7---Establishment of the Office of Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) Order (1 of 1983), Art. 9---Evacuee property---Lease of open plot---Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman), jurisdiction of---Petitioner / Evacuee Trust Board was aggrieved of restoration of lease of plot in question by Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman), which plot was leased out on the recommendation of the Minister concerned---Validity---Mechanism for the management, lease and disposal of Evacuee Trust properties was provided in Evacuee Trust Properties (Management and Disposal) Act, 1975, which was a special law---No provision was available in law whereby any authority was vested with the Minister to make recommendations to petitioner / Board for lease of any plot to any individual---Lease of plot owned by petitioner / Board to respondent did not fall within the jurisdiction of Wafaqi Mohtasib as provided in Art.9 of Establishment of the Office of Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) Order, 1983---There was no evidence brought on record by respondent regarding any malpractice committed by petitioner / Board and if any cancellation of plot in question was made by petitioner / Board, respondent had remedy of filing Revision before Federal Government under S. 17 of the Evacuee Trust Properties (Management and Disposal) Act, 1975---Land in question was a public asset and Courts of law were custodian of public properties public interest---While dealing with matters relating to such properties/assets or interests, it was inalienable obligation of the Courts to be very careful and cautious and assure itself to the extent of certainty that no foul was being played with the state assets---Extraordinary obligation was placed upon the Courts to keep abreast itself with law and facts of the case and when certain material facts were unearthed before it then the matter should be decided as per law without being influenced by respective pleadings of the parties---High Court set aside order passed by Wafaqi Mohtasib and lease of plot in question in favour of respondent was cancelled as the same was illegal and void ab-initio---Constitutional petition was allowed accordingly.

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 CLC