Pakistan Case Lawโ† Search
2018 PHC 1355

Sher Zada vs Dsitrict Collector etc

Citation2018 PHC 1355
CourtPeshawar High Court
Case No.W.P. No. 302-M of 2015
Date2018-01-17
Judge(s)Muhammad Ibrahim Khan
Resultpetition disposed of

MOHAMMAD IBRAHIM KHAN, J.- The Petitioner Sher Zada being bonafide real owner is in possession of the land measuring 2 kanals and 3 marlas and a residential house consisting of 5 rooms, covered under an area of 14 marlas. He is residing therein since many years. It was in past when the horrendous flood badly damaged the Kalam to Behrain road along with Bridge over the river Kalam at Behrain. The Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa was pleased and thereby constructed the road and Steel Bridge in the interest of public. For doing the needful, the property owned by the Petitioner measuring 2 kanals and 3 marlas and a residential house were utilized by the Respondents for construction of road and Bridge.

2. Previously , in order to restrain the Respondents from raising construction of the Steel Bridge a suit was filed with the prayer to restrain the Respondents from any sort of interference and taking possession of the landed property owned by the Petitioner. After filing written statement by the concerned Department the said suit was later on withdrawn. Thereafter, various communications were held with the Pakistan Army personnel, Assistant Commissioner Behrain and Naib Tehsildar Kalam and even the Worthy Deputy Commissioner Swat was also approached along with the Executive Engineer C&W High Division at Swat in this regard. The Provincial Government was requested to acquire the said land under the report of the upright Assistant Commissioner Behrain for making an award in respect of acquisition of the land. Till so far, the Respondents have not acquired the land owned by the Petitioner along with the house which has already been utilized for construction of the Steel Bridge. Hence, the present writ petition has been preferred by the Petitioner inter-alia on the grounds enumerated therein with the following prayer:- i. That the Respondents may kindly be directed to acquire the agriculture land of the Petitioner measuring 2 kanals 3 marlas as per report of revenue officers along with house consisting 5 rooms covered area 14 marlas. ii. That the Respondents may kindly be directed to make award under Land Acquisition Act and made payment of compensation to the Petitioner on the basis of market value of the above land. iii. Any other remedy , which is just, appropriate may also very kindly be awarded in favour of Petitioner against Respondents.

3. Arguments of learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned Astt: Advocate General appearing on behalf of the official Respondent were heard, available record delved deep into with their able assistance.

4. According to report of Tehsildar Kalam and as per reply under Serial No. 8 of the comments furnished by Respondent No. 1 i.e. the Worthy Deputy Commissioner Swat has submitted to the effect that "as per report of Tehsildar Kalam, it is evident that only land of the Applicant (herein the Petitioner) has been affected due to construction of Steel Bridge whereas house of the Applicant has become visible from the Bridge."

5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner referred to PLD 2010 Supreme Court 719 "Land Acquisition Collector and others V/S Mst. Iqbal Begum and others", wherein the relevant citation (b) speaks of:- "Object of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was to provide complete indemnity to owner and to allow acquisition of land without proper and adequate compensation."

Thus, if at all when the land owned by the Petitioner has been utilized by the Respondents and it has not been under the use of the Petitioner anymore along with the house, then it is incumbent upon the Respondents to make an award and acquire the land accordingly.

6. The learned Astt: Advocate General appearing on behalf of official Respondents is also conciliatory to the effect that the land of the Applicant/Petitioner has been affected due to construction of Steel Bridge and once house of the Applicant has also been rendered inutile for the purpose of living. Therefore, in the best interest of justice and in view of the comments so furnished by the Respondent No. I (Deputy Commissioner Swat), the land as well as the house be acquired by his office within three months for a definite award in accordance with the market value, for which the Worthy Deputy Commissioner Swat is directed accordingly.

7. In the above terms, this writ petition

For educational and research use only โ€” not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
DisclaimerยทPrivacyยทTermsยทSearch