ALI BAIG, J.---- This writ petition, filed under Article 71(2) of Gilgit-Baltistan (Empowerment and Self Governance)
Order 2009 and Article 86 of Gilgit-Baltistan Governance Order 2018 read with enabling articles of Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 against the Notification No.GB.INV/NAB/2012/255 dated 7th July 2014, issued by the respondent and judgments/orders dated 03-12-3016 and 30-12-2016 passe d by the learned judge National Accountability Court Gilgit and release of property owned by the petitioner measuring 2 kanals under khasra No.4463/2565/1 179 situated at Mouza Jutial Gilgit, frozen in Reference No.03/2016 , titled "State v. Syed Hadi and others ".
2. Precisely facts necessary for disposal of the instant writ petition are that a Reference bearing No.03/2016, titled "State v. Syed Nadi, Ex-Secretary Education and others " was subjudice in the court of judge National Accountability Court Gilgit-Baltistan and father of the petitioner , namely Mohammad Nasir , is also facing trial before the said court for alleged corruption and corrupt practices. The Deputy Director NAB Sub Office Gilgit, vide letter dated 7th July, 2014, addressed to the Secretary Home Gilgit-Baltistan, has stated that under the provisions of Section 23 of NAB Ordinance, 1999, any transfer of title or interest or creation of a charge on the property of accused Mohammad Nasir shall be void while the inquiry/ investigation proceedi ngs are pending before NAB or Accountability Court. In the list of properties of accused Mohammad Nasir , the property of the present petitioner was also included at serial No.(C).
3. The petitioner , through an application filed before the learned Accountability Court, had sought for release of his immovable property measuring 2 kanals situated at Jutial Gilgit claiming that the aforesaid property was purchased by him and accused Mohammad Nasir has nothing to do with the said proper ty. The learned judge National Accountability Court after hearing arguments on behalf of both the parties has dismissed the aforesaid petition of the petitioner vide impugned order dated 29/8/2018, hence this writ petition.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the impugned judgment/order passed by the learned judge National Accountability Court Gilgit-Baltistan is contrary to law and facts on the record of the case as such the impugned order passed by the learned trial court is not maintainable and liable to be set aside. The learned counsel for the petitioner further argued that the disputed property has been purchased by the petitioner through his own resources and the accused Mohammad Nasir has nothing to do with the said property , therefore, by accepting this writ petition, the respondent may be directed to release the frozen property in favour of the petitioner .
5. On the other hand, the learned Special Prosecutor NAB has opposed, the writ petition and supported the impugned judgment/order passed by the learned trial court by contending that the disputed property has been purchased by the accused Mohammad Nasir as, at that time, the present petitioner was student and had no sources of income to purchase the disputed property/land, therefore, the learned trial Court has rightly dismissed the petition of petitioner/objector through the impugned order which may be maintained.
6. We have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
7. It is case of the petitioner that father of the petitioner , namely Mohammad Nasir , is facing trial before the National Accountability Court for alleged corruption and corrupt practices. During investigation of case, DD National Accountability Bureau (R) Sub Office Gilgit issued notification to the Home Secreta ry under Section 23 of the NAB Ordinance 1999 stating that transfer of title or interest or creation of charge on the properties in the name/benamidar of accused Mohammad Nasir son of Bobulo resident of Ghizer shall be void while the inquiry/investigation proceedings are pending before the NAB or Accountability Court vide letter dated 7th July, 2014.
8. The present petitioner had challenged the aforesaid notice before the learned Accountability Court through an application claiming that land measuring 2 kanals, under khasra No.1179, situated at Jutial Gilgit, which has been included in the properties which are in the name/ benamidar of accused Mohammad Nasir , whereas, the said land has been purchased and owned by him, therefore, the said land may be released in favour of the petitioner . The learned trial court, after hearing argument s on behalf of the parties, has dismissed the petition of the petitioner vide impugned order dated 29-08-2018.
9. Since the petitioner has claimed that he has purchased the above mentioned land from his own independent means and sources and the same land has been transferred in his name, therefore, it would be appropriate to afford an opportunity to the petitioner/ benamidar to prove his assertion/claim by producing evidence before the learned trial court that the disputed property has been purchased by him as it is settled principle of law that no person can be condemned unheard as regard to any matter in which he is interested.
10. For the forgoing reasons, this writ petition is partially allowed in the terms that the petitioner shall have fair opportunity of hearing and production of evidence before the learned trial court in the light of his alleged claim about the property in question. Consequently , the impugned order dated 29/08/2018 passed by the learned judge National Accountability Court Gilgit is set aside. The case is remanded back to the learned trial court with the direction to afford fair opportunity of hearing of the petitioner/ benamidar , namely Asif Nasir and to produce evidence. Likewise, the respondent shall have the right of rebuttal and hearing. This writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. File.