' AFTAB HUSSAIN, C. J.--.-The Manoeuvres, Field Firing and Artillery Practice Act, 1938 was notified for inviting views of the public as to how far the Act or any of its provisions is repugnant to the Holy Qur'an or Sunnah of the Holy Prophet (p. b. h.). Mr. Abdul Malik Irfani in his comments gave the opinion that no provision of this law is against the teaching of the Qur'an and Sunnah. We agree with this opinion in respect of all, the provisions except the provision about the method of assessm ent of compensation in section 6. The objectionable portion is in subsection (2) which provides that the Revenue Officer shall consider all claims for compensation under section 5 and determine on local investigation and where possible after hearing the claimant, the amount of compensation, if any, which shall be awarded for each case and shall as far as possible reimburse on the spot to the claimant, the compensation so determined.
2. The objectionable portion is "and where possible -after hearing the claimant". These words are 'capable of being misconstrued and Revenue Officer may arbitrarily give the findings about want of possibility of hearing the claimant.
3. According to Hadeth of the Holy Prophet (p. b. h.) it is necessary that the effected party should be present before the Court. It is said that when a litigant appeared alone before Hazrat Ali, he asked him to bring his opponent because he could not hear the case in his absence. He repeated the Prohet's saying 'do not address the party unless along with him is also present the opposite party'.
(Al-mushing by lbn-e-Qudama volume 1X page (printed by Maktaba-i-Arriaz-ul-Hadsa), Abdullah Bin Zubair reported that both the disputants should be before the Judge. (Talkhees-ul-habir by Ibn-e-Hajjar Askalani Volume IV, page 197). Moreover the procedure laid down in the Holy Qur'an about the accounting to be done on the last day of Judgment before a person would be compensated for his good deed o punished for evil ones, proves that it is the right of person in respect of whom any dispute is under consideration by a Judge, to be given an opportunity of being heard.
4. In the case of dispute or claim arising before the Revenue Officer the party claiming the compensation must be given an opportunity of being heard. It is a different matter, if he does not appear before the Revenue Officer. The language of subsection (2) of section 6, therefore, requires amendment to the effect that the words "and where possible after hearing the claimant" in the subsection (2) of section 6, be substituted by the words "and after giving opportunity of being heard to the claimant". We order that this amendment be made by the 31st of December, 1982.