Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Official Citation: 2024 SHC 984
Court / Jurisdiction: Sindh High Court
Year of Decision: 2024
Decision Date: 2024-09-23
Parties: Abdul Rehman vs Province Of Sindh & Others
Ruling Summary: This decision was rendered by the Sindh High Court on 2024-09-23, officially reported as 2024 SHC 984. In this matter between Abdul Rehman and Province Of Sindh & Others, the court adjudicated key questions of statutory construction, procedural regularity, and legal precedent under Pakistani law.
Core Holding: The honorable bench evaluated governing statutory provisions and judicial authorities to establish the rights of the parties, delivering the binding reasoning set out below.
Case cited as 2024SHC984
Court Name: Sindh High Court Judge(s): Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam Title: Abdul Rehman vs Province Of Sindh & Others Case No.: Suit No.377 of 2023 Date of Judgment:2024-09-23 Reported As: 2024 SHC 984 Result: Order Accordingly
Judgment
ORDER It is not disagreed that this Lis can be decided on the basis of record and legal Issue. Mr. Qamar Raza Bloch, the Secretary Land Utilization Department is present. He was specifically quarried about his stance in Paragraph-3 of the Written Statement and the Impugned Cancellation Letter of 02.03.2023. The Secretary replies that he has scrutinized the record and the amount has been paid into the Public Exchequer; however, the above Letter was issued because the outward number is not tallying. Following legal Issue is framed_ i) Whether the Impugned Letter dated 02.03.2023, inter alia, withdrawing the Letter No.01-22- 02/SO-VII/524/2023, is justified and lawful? ii) What should the Order be? The Sindh Land Committee has given the Decision of regularization subject to payment of differential Malkano vide Missive dated 25.08.2022 (at page-95). The other important factor is, as confirmed by the above Officer, that differential Malkano has been received by the Government. If the Government Exchequer is not deprived of the assessed amount [differential Malkano], then, no fraud is alleged to have been committed by the Plaintiff, as stated in the Impugned Letter, as ground for cancellation. Thus, in these undisputed circumstances, the issuance of the Impugned Cancellation Letter was not justified. Such trivial matters should have been decided at the Departmental level by the functionaries, instead of shying away from their responsibilities and obligations. The conduct of the officials is
---
## Page 2
deplorable. Without scrutinizing the record, the Impugned Cancellation Letter was issued, which is not a proper exercise of authority and power; consequently, the Impugned Letter is set-aside. In view of the above, this Suit is partly decreed only to the extent of Prayer Clauses "A" and "D". All pending Application(s), if any, are also disposed of.