 |
| 2025 clc 1926 |
مخصوص مقصد پورا نہ ہونے پر حکومت زمین اپنے پاس نہیں رکھ سکتی — لاہور ہائی کورٹ کا فیصلہ
مقدمہ کا پس منظر
آئینی درخواست
عدالت کا قانونی جائزہ
آئین کے آرٹیکل 4 کا اطلاق
حتمی فیصلہ
Must read judgment.
2025 CLC 1926
[Lahore (Rawalpindi Bench)]
Before Jawad Hassan and Sardar Akbar Ali, JJ
Haji LASHKAR KHAN and others --Appellants Versus
PROVINCE OF PUNJAB and others-Respondents
Intra Court Appeal No. 01 of 2021, heard on 10th June, 2025.
(a) Public functionaries-
-Powers and obligations---Doctrine of resulting trust-Scope-Land-owners voluntarily transferred their land (measuring 10 kanals) in favour of the Government/Health Department for the specified purpose of establishing Basic Health Unit (BHU), however, at the time of final approval the Provincial Cabinet incial Cabinet declined the I the same on the ground that two BHUs were already operational in the said vicinity-Land-owners filed constitutional petition to retrieve/return their land but said relief was declined-Validity-Admittedly 10 kanals of land was transferred in favour of the Respondent/Department specifically for the establishment of BHU for the benefit of local vicinity but the Government's decision to abandon such project after the lapse of more than nineteen years amounts to failure of the basic condition upon which the land was transferred-The "doctrine of resulting trust" is attracted in such situations, where the land should revert to the original owners to prevent unjust enrichment by the State--The Government has taken no steps for the implementation of the proposed project and the subject land remains unutilized as is evident from fresh report sought by High Court--It is evident that land was admittedly transferred to the Respondent/Department for specific purpose that was not fulfilled till date-When property is transferred to the Government for a specific purpose and that purpose is not fulfilled, the transaction stands frustrated and the Government cannot retain such property for indefinite or alternative use without the consent of the donors-It is not permissible for the Government to retain the land as the underlying intention of the transfer no longer subsists and said aspect of the mat matter has totally been ignored by the Single Judge, while passing the impugned order-High Court set-aside the impugned order passed by Single Bench of High Court, consequently, the concerned Department (Respondent) would return the subject land to the appellants by reversing the relevant mutations and restoring the ownership to the original owner/owners or his/their legal heirs-Intra-Court Appeal was allowed, in circumstances.
(b) Constitution of Pakistan-
-Art. 4-Public functionaries---Powers and obligations---Equality of citizens-Land-owners voluntarily transferred their land (measuring 10 kanals) in favour of the Government/Health Department for the specified purpose of establishing Basic Health Unit (BHU), however, at the time of final approval the Provincial Cabinet declined the same on the ground that two BHUs were already operational in the said vicinity-Land-owners filed constitutional petition to retrieve/return their land but said relief was declined... Validity---Record reveals that Government decided to abandon project after the lapse of more than nineteen years-It is inalienable obligation of every public functionary, including the Respondents/Department, to act within the four corners of the of every citizen be treated in accordance with law Art. 4 c by Art. 4 of the Constitution-Hence, it is the duty and four corners of the mandate of the Constitution-High Court set-aside the impugned order passed by Single Bench of High Court: consequently, the concerned Department (Respondent) would return the subject land to the appellants by reversing the relevant mutations and restoring the ownership to the original owner/owners or his/their legal heirs---Appeal was allowed, in circumstances. Ch
. Afrasiab Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Muhammad Talib Shahzad for Appellants.
Malik Amjad Ali, Additional Advocate General Punjab with Barrister Raja Hashim Javed, Assistant Advocate General for
Respondents.