IKRAM-UL-HAQ vs GOVERNMENT OF BALOCHISTAN through Chief Secretary, Quetta S

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

IKRAM-UL-HAQ VS GOVERNMENT OF BALOCHISTAN through Chief Secretary, Quetta S.17---Pakistan Citizenship Rules, 1952, R.23(b)---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199---Domicile Certificate and Permanent Resident Certificate, issuance of---Prerequisites and criterion---Continuous residence and supporting ownership or tenancy records, proving of---Mandatory ten-year residency criterion---Scope---The petitioners challenged the impugned order whereby the domicile of petitioner No.1, originally issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Dera Ghazi Khan in 1994, was cancelled on 21.01.2025 by the Deputy Commissioner, Quetta, on grounds of prior domicile---Petitioner No.1 had permanently shifted to Quetta in 2003, married there, and since then resided continuously with his family, including petitioner Nos.2 to 6, who were all born and raised in Quetta---Upon petitioner No.2's application for issuance of domicile of District Quetta, required for higher education, the application was rejected under the impugned order---Held: The petitioner No.1 had a domicile of Dera Ghazi Khan issued in his favour on 25.04.1994 which was cancelled on his own request on 21.01.2025 by the Deputy Commissioner, Dera Ghazi Khan---With respect to seeking domicile of District Quetta by the children of the petitioner No.1 for higher studies it was necessary to clarify that the petitioner No.2 (daughter of petitioner No.1) had not annexed her educational credentials to establish her permanent residence in Quetta City---Petitioner No.2 was born on 17.10.2005 and after a considerable delay of thirteen years she obtained her birth registration certificate on 18.01.2018 which showed mala fide on her part---Petitioners failed to provide adequate proof of compliance with the SOPs including mandatory 10-year residency critera and supporting evidence such as valid property ownership or long terms rental agreements---No infirmity or perversity was found in the impugned order warranting interference by the High Court in its Constitutional jurisdiction---Petition was dismissed in limine, in circumstances.

IKRAM-UL-HAQ vs GOVERNMENT OF BALOCHISTAN through Chief Secretary, Quetta S — 2025 PLD 170 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PLD