 |
| محتسب اور جائیداد کے فیصلے۔ |
⚖️ جائیداد کے تنازعہ کا فیصلہ محتسب نہیں بلکہ سول کورٹ کرے گی
بلوچستان ہائی کورٹ کا اہم فیصلہ
🔹 ہائی کورٹ نے کیا قرار دیا؟
🔸 اہم قانونی اصول
⚖️ نتیجہ
🏛️ اہم حوالہ
Must read judgement.
2026 CLC 711
[Balochistan]
Before Muhammad Hashim Khan Kakar and Rozi Khan Barrech, JJ
MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM-Petitioner
Versus
The DIRECTOR GENERAL QUETTA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY QUETTA and 3 others-Respondents
C.P. No. 1707 of 2022, decided on 27th September, 2023.
Establishment of the Office of Ombudsman for the Province of Balochistan Ordinance (VI of 2001)---
---S.9---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.9--Constitution of Pakistan, Art.175-Proceedings before the Ombudsman (Mohtasib), challenge to-Maintainability-Dispute viz title and proprietary rights over property-Matter requiring evidence-Jurisdiction of Civil Court---Scope-Briefly, the petitioner, through the present constitutional pétition, assailed the Provincial Ombudsman. (Mohtasib) order directing handing over of or of possession of plot in question to respondent No.2, along with the consequential final demolition notice issued by the competent authority, and further challenged the Governor's order passed in the statutory representation, seeking that all such actions he declared without lawful authority-Held: Since there was a dispute/controversy related to declaration of rights, title and status of a person or property the Civil Court had the exclusive jurisdiction under S.9, C.P.C. to decide the same after recording of evidence-Scheme of Provincial Ombudsman Ordinance, 2001 did not bestow the powers upon the Ombudsman to examine cases of civil nature-Moreover, as per the spirit of $.11 of the Ordinance, 2001 the Provincial Ombudsman was the recommendatory body-Findings of the Ombudsman were of re recommendatory nature and not a judgment/decision, and such performance of quasi-judicial functions by itself did not convert an Authority into a Court---Office of Ombudsman was neither a Court nor a Judicial Tribunal within the scope of Art.175 of the Constitution--Assumption of jurisdiction. by Ombudsman in the present case was erroneous and could not be sustained and impugned order set aside-Constitutional petition was allowed, in circumstances.
Shafaatullah Qureshi v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 2001 SC 142 and Dr. Zahid Javed v. Dr. Tahir Riaz Chaudhary and others PLD
2016 SC 637 rel.
Farooq Anwar for Petitioner.
Ghulam Abbas Mandog for Respondent No. 2.
Shai Haq Baloch, A.A.G. for official Respondents.