2003 SCMR 464 SUPREME-COURT

Full text

ILAM DIN VS CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR OF AUQAF, LAHORE West Pakistan Waqf Properties Ordinance 1961--7 , West Pakistan Waqf Properties Ordinance 1961 ----Ss.7, 6 & 2(d)---Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958),'S.4---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)--Notification under S. 6 of the West Pakistan Waqf Properties Ordinance, 1961---Petition under S.7 of the said Ordinance---Limitation---Notification was issued on 21-12-1960---Appellants after receipt of eviction notice on 26-8-1967 filed petition under S.7 of the Ordinance before District Judge who allowed the petition, but High Court accepted appeal of respondent on the ground that at the time of issuance of notification, predecessor of appellants had no right or interest in disputed shop as Permanent Transfer Deed was issued in his favour in August, 1964, thus, he had no locus standi to challenge such notification; and that petition had been filed about 7 years after issuance of notification---Validity---Appellants had placed on record documentary evidence in support of their claim of ownership of disputed shop and its character as an evacuee property---Respondent had not established on record that disputed shop was owned by a Muslim, which was part of Waqf---Chief Administrator Auqaf in absence of any proof of disputed shop being a Waqf property would have no jurisdiction to issue notification under S.6 of the Ordinance treating same as Waqf Property and make such notification---Disputed shop had been constructed on an evacuee property, which had been transferred to predecessor of appellants in 1964--Chief Administrator of Auqaf at the time of issuance of notification under S.6 of the Ordinance due to location of shop had presumed that same was part of the property attached with mosque and was a Waqf property---Mere fact that shop was adjacent to shops forming part of Waqf, would not be an evidence of Waqf to bring same within purview of S.2(d) of the Ordinance to be notified under S.6 of the Ordinance---Appellants had come to know about notification on receipt of eviction notice sent to them by Auqaf Department and they, without wasting any time, had filed petition under S.7 of the Ordinance---Appellants had been in possession of disputed shop as owners without any interruption in the intervening period, thus, limitation for purpose of S.7 of the Ordinance would start from date of knowledge and not from date of publication of notification under S.6 of the Ordinance---High Court without properly attending to the character of property and considering the question of limitation, had non-suited appellants on technical grounds---Supreme Court accepted appeal, set aside impugned judgment and restored the judgment of District Judge in circumstances.