1990 SCMR 1607 SUPREME-COURT

Full text

PAKISTAN SPORTS COOPERATIVE INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY LTD. VS MUHAMMAD IQBAL BUTT, ADVOCATE, SIALKOT Evacuee Property and Displaced Persons Laws (Repeal) Act 1975--2 , Evacuee Property and Displaced Persons Laws (Repeal) Act 1975 ----S. 2---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185---Alteration in P.T.O. was held to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect by High Court in Constitutional jurisdiction---Leave to appeal---One industrial concern and house in question, were located adjacent to each other but were distinct and separate properties---Two rooms of the house subsequently came to be used for the purpose of industrial concern and had consistently remained in such use--Respondent, who was occupant of the house excluding that portion in occupation of industrial concern got whole of the house including the portion in possession of industrial concern, in auction---Respondent having obtained P.T.O. for the whole house, sought eviction of appellant from the portion of house and succeeded in appeal and second appeal from the High Court---Settlement Commissioner subsequently directed P.T.O. of respondent to be corrected in terms of order of Settlement Commissioner's order of specified date and same was corrected in terms of Settlement Commissioner's order---Respondent challenged order of alteration in P.T.O., by Constitutional petition which was accepted---Appellant's contention was that basic order of transfer and entitlement was that of Settlement Commissioner of specified date which was never disturbed or modified, and P.T.O. in any case had to conform to it and that High Court could not interfere with the same---Settlement Commissioner having divided the house and having confined respondent to the portion in his possession and maintaining the status quo with regard to the portion in possession of industrial concern/appellant, respondent could not claim to be the transferee of the whole house---Correction of P.T.O. and its conformity to the order passed on specified date could not be legally objected to by respondent and his Constitutional petition was liable to dismissal on that count---Notified officer was to determine the manner of disposal of the two rooms in possession of appellant and not dispose of in favour of respondent---Judgment of High Court was set aside.