Legal Principle & Question Decided

Ruling Summary: This decision was rendered by the Sindh High Court, officially reported as 2024 SHC 639. In this matter between Const. P. 376/2024 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi - Asad Waqar (Petitioner) and the Respondent, 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.

Full Judgment Text & Judicial Ruling

COURT: Sindh High Court CASE NO: Const. P. 376/2024 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi CITATION: 2026 SHC KHI 639 PARTIES: Asad Waqar (Petitioner) ORDER DATE: 19-MAR-26 BENCH: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ali Sangi(Author) A.F.R: Yes ------------------------------------------------------------ IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI PRESENT: MR. JUSTICE ADNAN-UL-KARIM MEMON, J. MR. JUSTICE ZULFIQAR ALI SANGI, J.

C.P.No.D-7974 of 2022 (Mst. Hafsa Binte Arshad versus Province of Sindh and others)

C.P.No.D-376 of 2024 (Asad Waqar versus Province of Sindh and others)

Date of hearing: 09.03.2026. Date of Order: 19.03.2026.

Mr. Muhammad Saleem Mangrio, Advocate for the Petitioner in C.P. No.D-7974/2022.

Mr. Hanif Faisal Alam, Advocate for Petitioner in C.P. No.D-376/2024.

Mr. Zia -ul-Haq Makhdoom, Advocate for Respondent a/w Ms. Hira Agha and Fatima Ashfaq, Advocates for Respondents Nos.4 to 6 in C.P. No.D -7974/2022 and for Respondent No.5 in C.P. No.D - 376/2024.

Mr. Sarmad Hani along with Mr. Meezan Ali, Advocate s for Respondent No.5 in C.P. No.D-376/2024.

Mr. Ayan Mustafa Memon, Advocate for Respondent No.7. Mr. Qaim Ali Memon, Advocate for Respondent. Mr. Syed Zaeem Haider, Advocate for Applicant/Intervener. M/s. Amanullah Qazi and Humaira Jatoi, Advocates for SBCA. Mr. Anwar Khalid, Advocate for Sindh Master Plan Authority. Ms. Nazia Siddiqui, Advocate for KDA. Mr. Abdul Jaleel Zubedi, A.A.G.

JUDGMENT

ZULFIQAR ALI SANGI, J: By this common Judgment, we propose to dispose of the instant petitions along with the listed application s, as they involve identical questions of law and fact and arise out of the same set of circumstances.

2. The Petitioner Mst. Hafsa Binte Arshad has filed “Constitution Petition No.D-7974/2022” under Article -199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 seeking following relief:-

I. Declare that KDA is the lawful owner of land admeasuring 1.666.66 30 yards in Survey No. 171 Deh Gujra, Block 13 -C. Gulshan-e-Iqbal, KDA Scheme 24, Main University Road Karachi (the Subject Property), and it forms part of Scheme-24 of KDA,

C.P. Nos.D-7974 of 2022 and C.P. Nos.D-376 of 2024 Page 2 of 26

II. Declare that the Lease Deed dated 23.07.1996 is illegal and void ab initio, for being executed malafidely for extraneous consideration and without juri sdiction, and ac cordingly cancel the Lease Deed,

III. Declare that the Respondents in particular Respondent No. 3 had no authority to pass the Impugned Decision dated 17.04.2017 or issue Regularization Letter dated 16.05.2017 in respect of the Subject Property, and set aside and quash them,

IV. Declare that the Respondents No. 4 to 6 are not lawful owners of the Subject Property, and direct the Respondents In particular Respondents No. 4 to 6 to handover physical vacant possession of the Subject Property to KDA,

V. Declare that the Subject Property is by -birth a designate Petrol pump plot and neither it can be used for any other commercial purpose nor a multi-stories building can be raised thereon,

VI. Declare that Respondent No. 8/KDA or Respondent No. 2/Land Utilization Department has no authority to dispose of any Petrol pump / commercial plot (including Subject Property) except by way of a public auction in accordance with law,

VII. Declare that the Respondents No. 8 and 9 have acted Illegally by withdrawing Suit No. 795 of 2018 and CP. No. D -7504 of 2019, and surrendering the Subject Property in favour of Respondent No. 4, and take departmental disciplinary action against Respondent No. 9 for misconduct and compromising the interest of KDA along with public at large,

VIII. Appoint the Learned Nazir of the Court to inspect the Subject Property and report the status and construction thereof including existence of site/booking office of the proposed project and dismantled/closed petrol pump,

IX. Permanently restrain the Respondents No. 4 to 6 or any person under them from raising any construction or creating any third - party interest and/or handing over possession of the Subj ect Property to any third party,

X. Permanently restrain the Respondents in particular Respondent No. 10/SCBA not to sanction or approve any proposed building plan or additional/alteration plan in respect of the Subject Property till decision of this petition,

XI. Permanently restrain the official Respondents from passing any order or directions in respect of the Subject Property, and

XII. Grant any other relief as this Honourable Court deems appropriate in the suit.

3. The facts giving rise to the present Constitutional Petition [C.P. No. D-7974 of 2022] are that the Petitioner, claiming to be a resident of the concerned locality, has invoked the constitutional jurisdiction of this Court by filing the instant petition impugning the legality and validity of the lease, subsequent regularization, and the proposed change of land use in respect of a plot measuring 1, 666.66 square yards, situated in Survey No.171, Deh Gujro, Block -13-C, Gulshan-e- Iqbal, KDA Scheme No.24, Main University Road, Karachi (hereinafter referred to as the “Subject Property”). The Petitioner maintains that the Subject Property constitutes publ ic land vested in the Karachi Development Authority (KDA) and that the acts and conduct of the

C.P. Nos.D-7974 of 2022 and C.P. Nos.D-376 of 2024 Page 3 of 26

official respondents in leasing out and subsequently regularizing the said land in favour of Respondent No.4 are wholly unlawful, arbitrary, and without lawful authority. The Petitioner contends that the Subject Property was never disposed of through public auction, which is the prescribed and mandatory mode for disposal of commercial plots under the KDA (Disposal of Land) Rules, 1971, and therefore the ownership and title of the Subject Property have continued to vest in KDA. The description of the land contained in the lease deed corresponds with the description of the Subject Property, though it refers to Na-Class land instead of Survey land.

4. The genesis of the dispute can be traced back to the year 1964, when the Government of West Pakistan, through the Basic Democracies, Social Welfare and Local Government Department, issued Notification No. SO -IV(LG)KDA/7-16/62 dated 09.06.1964, whereby Karachi Development Authority Scheme No.24, designated as Federal B -1 Site at Country Club Road, Karachi, comprising approximately 2.662 acres of land situated in Deh Gujro and Okewari, was duly sanctioned. The Petitioner contents that pursuant to the aforesaid notification, the Deputy Commissioner, Karachi, through a Possession Report dated 09.09.1964, formally handed over possession of the land forming part of the said scheme to KDA. The said possession report indicates that the entire land comprising Survey No.171, Deh Gujro, was delivered to KDA and that at the time of such transfer the land was Government land, free from any private ownership or evacuee claims. It is further contented that the Subject Property forms part of Survey No.171, which subsequently became part of Block-13-C, Gulshan -e-Iqbal, under the master planning carried out by KDA. As per the Master Plan prepared by the competent planning authorities of KDA, the said plot was earmarked exclusively for petrol pump purposes. However, the material placed on rec ord further discloses that on 23.07.1996, the Government of Sindh, through the office of the Mukhtiarkar, executed a Lease Deed in respect of land measuring 1,666.67 square yards, described as Na - Class No.171, Deh Gujro, in favour of late Rana Azhar Ali (h ereinafter referred to as the “Deceased”). The said lease was purportedly granted for a period of ninety -nine (99) years for commercial/petrol pump purposes. The Petitioner alleges that the said lease was granted without lawful authority, on the ground tha t after the sanction of KDA Scheme-24 and the handing over of possession of the land to KDA, the Mukhtiarkar or the Land Utilization Department lacked the

C.P. Nos.D-7974 of 2022 and C.P. Nos.D-376 of 2024 Page 4 of 26

jurisdiction or competence to lease out the land. It is further alleged that during his lifetime the Deceased occupied the Subject Property and established a petrol pump, which was subsequently operated through M/s Shell Pakistan Limited via its retailer, Respondent No.7. In the year 2012, KDA issued a Show Cause Notice dated 28.01.2012 to Respondent No.7 requiring removal of the alleged encroachment from the Subject Property. The said notice was assailed before this Court through C.P. No. D -542 of 2012, which is stated to be pending adjudication. During the pendency of the said proceedings, this Court through order dated 28.04.2017 directed that no third -party interest shall be created in respect of the Subject Property. It reflects from the contents of the petition that during the pendency of the said proceedings, the Land Utilization Department, through its Section Officer, sought clarification regarding the ownership status of the Subject Property from the Deputy Commissioner, Karachi. In response thereto, the then Mukhtiarkar, through comments dated 11.04.2012, acknowledged that the Subject Property belongs to KDA. Notwithstanding the aforesaid position, Respondent No.4 instituted C.P. No. D -1787 of 2012 before this Court seeking directions for regularization of th e Subject Property and issuance of challan for payment of differential charges in terms of the relevant provisions of Ordinance No. III of 2001. The record indicates that the Land Utilization Committee, in its meeting held on 05.01.2012, had resolved that the land in question could not be regularized until the dispute relating to its title attained finality before the competent courts. Despite the said decision, the matter was subsequently reconsidered. In the meantime, KDA filed an intervener application i n the said petition and also addressed communications dated 21.01.2017 and 01.02.2017 to the concerned authorities informing them that the Subject Property formed part of KDA Scheme -24, and requesting that no steps be taken towards regularization of the la nd while the matter remained sub judice before this Court.

5. It is alleged that notwithstanding such objections, a meeting of the Sindh Government Lands Committee was convened on 17.04.2017 to consider the request of Respondent No.4 for regularization of the Subject Property. The Petitioner contends that notice of the said meeting was served upon KDA only after the meeting had already concluded, thereby depriving KDA of an effective opportunity of being heard. During the said meeting, the Committee resolv ed to regularize the plot measuring 1,666.60 square yards in Na -Class No.171 of Deh

C.P. Nos.D-7974 of 2022 and C.P. Nos.D-376 of 2024 Page 5 of 26

Gujro in favour of Respondent No.4, subject to payment of certain charges described as loss caused to the Government. The said decision was thereafter communicated to the D eputy Commissioner (East), Karachi, through letter dated 16.05.2017, requesting that necessary entries be made in the revenue record. According to the Petitioner, the said decision was taken without jurisdiction and in violation of the principles of natura l justice, particularly in view of the pendency of litigation before this Court . It is further stated that after the aforesaid decision was taken, Respondent No.4 withdrew C.P. No. D -1787 of 2012, and the said petition was disposed of through order dated 18.10.2017, without prejudice to the rights of other parties. Subsequently, KDA instituted Suit No.795 of 2018 before the competent court seeking declaration of ownership of the Subject Property and cancellation of the Lease Deed as well as the regularization decision. During the pendency of the said suit, the Court through order dated 16.11.2020 restrained the respondents from creating any third -party interest in respect of the Subject Property. The Petitioner has further alleged that at a later stage the Deputy Commissioner, Karachi East, who had earlier been involved in the matter, was appointed as Director General, KDA, whereafter the stance of KDA underwent a material change and KDA proceeded to file applications seeking withdrawal of the aforesaid suit. Ultimately, through order dated 21.10.2022, the suit instituted by KDA was permitted to be withdrawn unconditionally. The Petitioner asserts that such withdrawal was collusive in nature and resulted in the surrender of valuable public land in favour of a private party. It is further averred that the petrol pump operating upon the Subject Property was closed and dismantled in the year 2019, and that Respondent No.4 has since constructed a site/booking office and is reportedly seeking approval for construction of a multi-story commercial building upon the Subject Property. According to the Petitioner, any such construction would be in violation of the Master Plan, the applicable development laws, and the rights and interests of the residents of the locality. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid actions and apprehending that the authorities may proceed to approve construction upon the Subject Property leading to the creation of third -party interests, the Petitioner has invoked the constitutional jurisdiction of thi s Court through the present petition seeking appropriate relief in accordance with law.

6. On notices, Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have filed their respective comments contesting the maintainability of the instant petition and

C.P. Nos.D-7974 of 2022 and C.P. Nos.D-376 of 2024 Page 6 of 26

have prayed for its dismissal in limine. They have raised preliminary objections to the effect that the petitioner has approached this Court with unclean hands by allegedly setting up a false, fabricated, and concocted narrative and is, therefore, not entitled to any discretionary relief under the constitutional jurisdiction of this Court. It has further been contended that no cause of action has accrued to the petitioner against the answering respondents, as the petitioner has no lawful interest or concern whatsoever with the land formin g the subject matter of the petition. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have further maintained that the land in question belongs to the Government of Sindh and was allotted through the Land Utilization Department on lease in the year 1996. According to them, the ma tter relating to the said land had been duly examined and decided by the competent committee constituted by the Government of Sindh for the purpose of regularization of government land. It has been asserted that the entire process, including the regularization of the land and conversion of the lease, was undertaken strictly in accordance with the applicable law and in conformity with the provisions of the Colonization and Disposal of Government Lands Sindh Act, 1912, as well as other relevant rules governing government land. The respondents have categorically denied any illegality, irregularity, or mala fide on their part and have contended that the allegations levelled in the petition are wholly incorrect, misconceived, and devoid of substance. It has furth er been stated that several averments made in the petition do not pertain to Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and that the petitioner has failed to establish any legal right, interest, or locus standi in respect of the property in question. On the basis of the foregoing submissions, Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have prayed that the instant petition be dismissed with costs.

7. The private Respondents Nos. 4 to 6 have also filed their counter-affidavit wherein they have contended that the present petition is not maintainable either in law or on facts and is liable to be dismissed with costs. According to them, the allegations contained in the petition are false, frivolous, vexatious, and self -serving, and have been levelled with mala fide intentions. It is asserted tha t the petition constitutes a clear abuse of the process of this Court and has been instituted with ulterior motives to harass and blackmail the answering respondents. The private respondents have further contended that the petitioner lacks locus standi to maintain the present petition and has approached this Court without clean hands. It is their stance that the petitioner has no concern whatsoever with the subject property and

C.P. Nos.D-7974 of 2022 and C.P. Nos.D-376 of 2024 Page 7 of 26

that the petition has been filed at the behest of her father -in-law with the intention of exerting pressure upon and extracting unlawful gain from the answering respondents. It has further been alleged that the petitioner and her in -laws are habitual blackmailers who seek to harass members of the business community, particularly build ers and developers, for ulterior and wrongful gains. It has also been contended that the instant petition involves disputed questions of fact relating to title, ownership, and possession of the property, which cannot be adjudicated in the constitutional ju risdiction of this Court under Article 199 of the Constitution. According to the respondents, the relief sought by the petitioner essentially relates to the cancellation of title documents and the grant of declaratory relief, matters which squarely fall wi thin the exclusive domain of the civil courts and can only be pursued through a properly instituted civil suit under the relevant provisions of the Specific Relief Act.

8. On merits, Respondents Nos. 4 to 6 have asserted that the subject property was originally granted by the Government of Sindh in favour of Late Rana Azhar Ali Khan, the predecessor -in-interest of the answering respondents, on 13.08.1963 for a period of ten years. Thereafter, a lease for a period of thirty years was granted to him on 02.02.1964, prior to the notification dated 09.06.1964 issued in favour of the Karachi Development Authority (KDA). It has been stated that an area measuring approximately 1,000 square yards from Survey No. 171 of Deh Gujro was initially granted to the said pre decessor by the Deputy Commissioner, Karachi, in the year 1963, and subsequently an additional area measuring 666.66 square yards was also allotted through the Land Utilization Department. According to them, said land was granted and leased in accordance w ith the applicable legal framework governing government land, including the Sindh Colonization of Government Lands Act, 1912, as well as other relevant land revenue laws. The respondents have further submitted that a lease agreement in respect of the subje ct property was duly executed between the Government of Sindh and Late Rana Azhar Ali Khan and that the property was subsequently granted a long -term lease of 99 years on 23rd July, 1996 for commercial and petrol pump purposes. After the demise of the orig inal allottee, his legal heirs approached the competent authorities for regularization of the property. The matter was thereafter placed before the Sindh Government Lands Committee, which ultimately decided to regularize the property in favour of the legal heirs. Pursuant thereto, the Government of Sindh issued a

C.P. Nos.D-7974 of 2022 and C.P. Nos.D-376 of 2024 Page 8 of 26

regularization letter in the year 2017, thereby restoring and regularizing the land in favour of the predecessor -in-interest of Respondents Nos. 4 to 6. It has also been contended that the subject property does not form part of the land vested in the Karachi Development Authority for Scheme No. 24, and that the ownership of the property in favour of the predecessor of the answering respondents has been acknowledged in earlier litigation as well. In this regard, reference has been made to a constitutional petition previously filed by the Karachi Development Authority which was subsequently withdrawn after verification of the official record confirming that the land had been leased by the Board of Reve nue in favour of the predecessor of Respondents Nos. 4 to 6. The respondents have further asserted that the predecessor -in-interest had also initiated rent proceedings in respect of the property against a commercial occupant, which ultimately culminated in orders for delivery of possession in his favour, thereby demonstrating his lawful possession and control over the subject property. According to the answering respondents, the entire process of allotment, lease, and subsequent regularization of the land w as undertaken strictly in accordance with law and through competent authorities, and the petitioner has failed to establish any violation of law or infringement of her legal rights. It has been further contended that the petitioner possesses no legal inter est in the property and, therefore, lacks the competence to challenge the title or ownership of the answering respondents. They have further maintained that the answering respondents, being the lawful successors and legal heirs of the original allottee, ar e entitled to enjoy and utilize the property in accordance with law, and that their rights are protected under the constitutional guarantees relating to property and lawful trade or business. On the basis of the foregoing submissions, Respondents Nos. 4 to 6 have prayed that the instant petition be dismissed with exemplary costs, and that appropriate action be taken against the petitioner for making false and misleading statements before this Court.

9. Respondent Nos. 8 and 9 Karachi Development Authority (KDA) have also filed their comments wherein it has been contended that KDA Scheme No. 24, Gulshan -e-Iqbal was duly framed and notified vide Notification No. SO-4 (LG) KDA/7-16/62 dated 15.06.1964. It has been asserted that the land in question had, prior to the issuance of the said notification, already been allotted by the Deputy Commissioner, Karachi to Rana Azhar Ali Khan in the year 1963 for

C.P. Nos.D-7974 of 2022 and C.P. Nos.D-376 of 2024 Page 9 of 26

the establishment of a petrol pump, and thus such allotme nt preceded the notification of the aforesaid scheme. It has further been stated that in the layout plan prepared by KDA for Scheme -24, the subject plot was duly reflected as a petrol pump site and designated as “PP” (Petrol Pump). Subsequently, the Execut ive Engineer, Scheme -24, KDA issued the requisite site plan in respect of the said plot. According to KDA, the original allottee thereafter entered into a rental arrangement with Shell Pakistan Limited through its retailer Aamir Baqi for operating a petrol pump at the said site. It has further been stated that permission for installation of a CNG station was also granted by the Master Plan Department pursuant to proceedings conducted before the Provincial Ombudsman (Mohtasib), Sindh. KDA has further explained that the subject land was initially granted on lease by the Deputy Commissioner, Karachi for a period of thirty years on 13.08.1963. Upon expiry of the said lease period, the Board of Revenue, Sindh, through its Member, regularize d and extended the lease in favour of the allottee for a further period of ninety -nine years in the year 1996. According to KDA, the Board of Revenue remained the lessor and competent authority with respect to the said land. It is further the stance of KDA that a dispute subsequently arose between KDA and the Board of Revenue regarding the jurisdiction of the land, particularly on the question as to whether the subject land fell within the notified boundaries of Scheme -24. While KDA initially maintained that the land formed part of the scheme area, the Board of Revenue did not concur with such position in view of the prior allotment made through the office of the Deputy Commissioner. According to KDA, the matter was ultimately examined by the Lands Committee constituted by the Government of Sindh under the chairmanship of a Senior Judge of this Court. After examining the record and hearing the concerned parties, the said Lands Committee regularized the land in favour of the original allottee and his legal hei rs. KDA has further stated that proceedings were also initiated under Section 3(1) of the Sindh Public Property (Removal of Encroachment) Act, 2010. During the course of such proceedings, it transpired that the occupant possessed documentary title issued b y the competent authority of the Government of Sindh through the Land Utilization Department of the Board of Revenue. In view of the said documents and the regularization proceedings conducted before the Lands Committee, the occupation of the land was foun d…

Read the unabridged text and precedent citation network on Al Wakeelo Legal Research Platform.

Related Legal Research & Directories

• Browse all judgments from Sindh High Court
• Search Pakistani statutes: Constitution of Pakistan 1973, PPC, CrPC, CPC & Family Laws
• Analyze this case with Al Wakeelo AI Legal Assistant