Javed Akhter VS Government

c.fr

JIIDGMENT SlllrL'l'

PI.]Sr IAWAr{ r I I(; I I COU R'l', Al}l}O',l'l'Alt^ l)

I]IINCII

,r I r t)tct A t, t)tiPA lt't'M IiN'l'

Writ l'}ctition No.902-A ol'20llt

.IUIX;MEN'I'

l)utL'rt/ lu:uring )5 l0 20 t8

l)t lilioti('t /.\) ...(.luvatl .lkhtur und rtlhars.l h.t .\'lr \lrrl'ttrtttrrttrtl .lt ltrtn gi r Klurt,,,ldroctrt c... ......

llc.\l)()t l(t1ll.\').../(iore rnntnl o/ Kh)'bar l)akltluttkhtu lltt tttrgh St'tt't'lury lntul llolitt.s. l'e.slrutur tttul lira ttthtr.t) h.t .\lr. I'tr.:ir /.uhoor .lhhtr.vi. .1.\.\i\tittlt I lvotult' r ()ettrt ul

SY[,I) MI.JIIAMM Ar) A'r-TI() UE SlIAIl, ,I.- Javcd Al<htar anci llvc othcrs, pctitioncrs. sccl( Lllr:

(:onstitutional .ir-rrisdiction o[' tliis Court undcr n rlicl(] i(i{, ol thc ('otlstitLtt iorr ol' Islarnic llcpLrblic oi l)al<istan. 197.]. u,ith thc lirllowing. pravcr:

" lt is respeclJitll.y prayal thut this I lonturuhl'' (-ourl noy grucirtttslY Pleuse lo:

(i)Dcclurc thfi lha impugned Noti/icttlions t'i/S 4&9i tt/' I-and Acquisilion .4cl 1894 t'itlc No.t024 ttutetl 16.09.2016, N0.4699 tlutctl 2l.05.2018 un procee itrg (t/S 6 ttf l'untl /ctluisitiotr Act t 894 tre illegul, uttluwfitl' urbilrorlt, tliscriminutorlt, )uilhoul i uristlicliort' yoitl ub-ittitio und hoving no legul (llbct ttpon It;i'rights o.f Pct ilion crs.

(ti)l)cclira tlt t thc e lire ocqttisiiiott pro(ecdin!:s ittiiiutcd h.l' thc rcsportdenls orc uttlotr'.f ul' t

urhilror.t' u,td uns sloinohle /br fion- contpliuttt'c o.f lhe mondulorl' slululor.t' provisiotts ond purpose of the rcquisition is nd./br lhe bcnefil tt the generul public being litttt'hurrcd,

(iii)Det'lure thut ucquisition ttJ gruvel'ottl is wilhout lux,litl jusli./icution, trbilrurl utrrl .jttsr ./itr ./itcilitutiotr lo cerluirt ltryttl n"rto,rt n,,,, docs nol cover the ohiective o/ wellhre ./itr i.ianerul p uhlic.

(ir') l)et'lura lltot the respondenls hove commilletl discrimin utittrt u1;uinsl petilioners, os raspondcnls ltuve ulreatly le-notiJied noti.fit'utiott rt/'lhe sume locolily lhrough Ntt. .,lt'q/ 1 82 l -26 tluted 25.04.20 1 8.

(v)y'tt.t'othcr relieJ which this Ilonourobla (''ourl mu.'1, decm.fit nnd proper muy ulso he gronted."

l. Ir.t csscncc, thc gricvancc olthc pctitioncrs is that thc rcspondcnts havc initiarcd procccditrr.s rrndcl scction 4 ol'thc Larrd Acquisition Act. I 894 vidc Notilication No. 1024 datcd 16.09.201 6, u'lrich arc illcgal arrtl against thc law in oldcr to dcprivc tl'rc pctitioncrs lionr thcir land undcr thc garb ol'gravc;-artl cluc to inllucncc ol'local MI'A and l)istrict Mcmbcr. as thc 1-rctitioncrs wcrc thcir opponcnls in thc clcctions' 3 Argurncnts hcard. Ilccord pcrusccl'

4.l)crusal ol' rccord would rcvcal tl-rat thc prcscnt pctitioncrs havc carlicr lilcd scparatc Writ I'ctition No.85-A/2017 ancl W.P No 96-A/2017 bclirrc lhis (lourt, which wcrc disposcd ol vidc ordcr datccl 0(r.0(r.20 I 7 irr thc lirllowing tcnns.

",l.ficr urgumenls t some lengllt, \rlt(n .'o Jr.,,tlt! witlt tltt u\\(rliott itt the writ petition with regurd lo./iling o.f objectiotr petition bt, lhc pelilioners, lhe leurned connscl .fbr thc pclitioners ugreed to tlrc propttsul thd let such oltiection petilittn btt tlecided h1, the authorily i.e. Deputl' Commissioner / I-arul,4ctluisilirtn Collct:tor,,'lbbdtobud (resprntdenl No.2) itr nccortlonce with luw, ttlicr provitlittg opporlutti\t o/ hearing lo thc pclilioners, and then rcrulering u lccision, wilh reuslns, ltt the objecliotr petitiott, pending beJbre thc outlnrity, ut lha aurliest, hul in rtrt cuse loler thtn a Jbrlnight./rom lhe rct:eipt oJ this order. "

lhc pctitioncls hcrcin oncc again lllcd thcil scparatc writ pctitions bcaring W.l'] No.862-A/20,l7 and W'l) No.tt92-A/201 7 on thc samc grounds, which wcrc subscqucntly dismisscd through a cofillron judgmcnt clatccl 14. I 1 .2011 .

'l'his Courl would likc to rcproclucc hclcin bclow thc opcraling par1 ol- thc said judgmcnt lirr thc sakc of collvcnicncc and rcady rcl'crcncc:

"'[rLta lhrtl thc l-und ,lctluisilion lcl is rt t'0nfiscotot.l stolute designed lo tuka properlies oJ'the citizens lhrough utcrt'iva nrcosures but Jbr alequote t:ottsidcrulion und puhlic Putposes' 'l'he suit! mole is beittg recognizel b1' lhe tottstittik)n oJ lsluntic Republic ol l'trkisttn under Article 24- ll is nrtl tha case oJ the petitioncr ll'ttl tlte purpose./br which the propert.l' hos been uctluired, docs rtr ftll within the ntischief tt puhlic purposc' Tlteir onll' grievance is th{rt the selection of' thc site is ngaittsl tlrc grortnd redilies' 'l'hc seleclktn oJ site is tha !;ole livrrtittrt rtl the tuiri ::

rlepttrlmenl. ll is.fbr tht:ttt lrt 'sitltttt tt

C

sile suilable und Jbasihle uccording lo lheir demund/requirenent, lhe Iligh Court while excrcising discretiotr .for the rcquiring ieptrtmenl rcgtnling tlrt:;tlttlion ttJ sile unlcss lh .snnru i'; csluhlislrc to be husel on muk(itlt:, ogainst the puhlic interest or will hlt'c ulversa elfecl on environmenl rtr ec'olog1'. In tlrc present cuse, lhe reutnl revaals llrol llrc sites ltavt: bacn .relecled oJier due deliberaliotr tuilh thc elccted r(presenlutivc of lhc !orulit1'. 'I'he allegutions thul tltc selaction of lhe ProPertY o/ lhc petitioner is nt sustttinuble untl stttttt: othcr !und which is the ownership rl politicnllf influentiul memhers ol lhe society, has hecn lefi out, nmY have some weighl ltul can'l be decided h1' the Courl under utnstittttirtn o ! .jurixliction as lha s0rue urr essentitrlly tlispuled queslitttt qf Jut'ls. I''or whnt hos heen discussed olxtve, holh the writ petitions heing herc/i rt/' un1' me ril, stunds dismissed."

llcing dissatisllcd with thc abovcmcntioncd dccisron ol'this (lourt, pctilioncrs No.7 to 9 lllcd Civil l)ctittot.t No.4777 o{'2017 bcfbrc thc august Apcx Court, which \\,11s dismisscd vidc ordcr datcd I 6.02.201 [], in 1hc lirllorvir-rg tct'ttts

'"t'he tund belongittg to the pelilioners hus heen tctluiral for the purpose o/ u grot,cl'urd, which is a puhlic purpose' 7'hey clmllengerl the said acquisiliotr lhrouglt tt Conslitrrtion pctilion helitrc lhe leurnel lligh Courl primnril.l' rttt tha grounrls lhd the ureo surroundintt rhe land in issue is oll residcnliul unl conslructed, tts such, tlte some is ttttt utntputible .fbr the required purprtse' ond thol the petilioners rttvnad ttnrl possessed onll'tlrc land itt issue whit:h the'1'require.fbr constructitttt tt/ th eir house. Moreovcr, mulu fitlc is nlxt 'Iltit lokan ns one oJ llrc grounds'

t

leorne lligh Court dismissed lha petitio,t os the suittrhility lo ouluire lhe propcrt]' Jbr puhlic purpose is tht:

.jurisdiclion nnd donurin ol' lhe trt rluirittg rtutltorit.t' unl lltr pt'lilirtrt,'rr hove nol lteen thle to sulis./.y lha (lttttl lhol the prlpettf in questiott l.r trttsuilnble. ,4s./or ts the tllegation ol rnuloJitlr i.t t unterned, llrc tnntr i.t gener(l in ttuture arul ltas nol lteett .;uhstnnlioled b1, the petitioners. 'l'ht other nllegotion that tlte Chaitnrun o/ tlte llnion Courrcil i) s inslrumenl litt soving his properl): us well ns propcrl.y ol his relatives, and therefitra, lltt: proper0: tl lhe petitioners hos becn uctluiretl, is ulso trot suhstontialed. Tharefore, no interferente is ctrllad ./br. 7'he petititttt is occordittgll' d is mis sed."

5 . I t rnay bc mcntioncd hcrc that in ordcr to r'csolvc thc controvcrsy amicably, this (lourt has appointcd a local commisskrn lor spot inspcction in prcscncc of- thc partics wilh a vicw to asccltain l'casibility ol- thc land in clucstion lor thc purposc ol' gravcyard or othcrwisc 'l'hc rcport o1'comnrissitrn

suggcsts that thclc cxists an old gravcyard towards north and sor-rtlr o1'thc propcrty in qr-rcstion and thcrc .rrc hoLtscs constrllctcd in thc vicinity towards thc r\'cst and gl'avcs arc also cxistcd on thc spot ancl a path lcading to two houscs constructcd ovcr thcrc' ln viL:w o[' thc rcport o1' local commission, it bccorncs clcar tha[ thcrc cxists old gravcyal'ds in thrcc clircctions o[' thc plopcrty in qucstion and thc samc is l'casiblc lbr t

(r

tl'rc saicl purposc. 'l'hc local commission has also mcntionccl in his rcport that landowncrs ol two 'khasrct ' numbcrs i.c. 48UU/l and 4890/l havc nol challcngcd thc acquisition ol'thcir land or rnadc party in Ll'rc prcscnt u,rit pctition. No discrirr"r illation, as allcgcd by thc pctitioncrs, has bccn cotntrittcd by thc rcspondcnts, il-any othcl propcrty is dc-notificd by thc accluirinr dcpartmcnt. Morcovcr, thc allcgcd discrirr-rination could not bc dctclminccl without lccorcling cvidcncc, which is not admissiblc in wlit .jr-rrisdiction o1'this (lourt. Sirlilarly, thc contcntion o1'

thc pctitioncrs that thc acquiring dcpartmcnt has I'ailcd to corr-rplcic thc acquisition procccdings within onc ycar', thcrclorc, thc Notification undcr Subscction (l) ol'scction 4. in vicw o1'thc alncnducnl oi'Scction r[, shall stan<l rcvol<cd is without lorcc bccar-rsc it will havc no bcaring on thc casc ol- thc pctitioncrs as thc saicl atncndtncnt sccms to bc prornulgatcd only in ordcr to avoirl cscalation in thc priccs ol thc acquircd lancl so as kr saf'cguard thc intcrcst ol'thc landowncrs' All thcsc objcctions could bc takcn by thc pctitioncrs at an appropriatc stagc bclotc thc compctcnt lbt'lttn' Irr short. thc rlattcl'in issuc lras ah'cady bocn dccidcd t

up to thc eLrgust Suprcmc (lourt ol'I'akistart. antl. this (',rLrit i'onsiclcls that thc pctitioncrs alc agitaLiug tlrc sur.nc grouncls in thc prcscnt writ pctition vi"hich cor-rld not bc rcopcncd in thc prcscnt writ pctition. 'll-rc pctitioncrs could not rnakc out a casc Iirr intcrlclcncc hr this (lourt in its constilutional jurisdiction ancl tl'rc prcscnt wlit pctition bcing misconccivcd is liablc to bc disn'r isscd

(r. Accordingly, thc prcsct'rt writ pctition is dismisscd

.tUI 1..

fiTr Dt.25.10.2018.